TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 371 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134949; 14534-1_0371 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 371 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134949?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 379 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134938; 14534-1_0379 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 379 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134938?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 384 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134654; 14534-1_0384 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 384 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134654?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 373 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134479; 14534-1_0373 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 373 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134479?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 370 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134425; 14534-1_0370 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 370 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134425?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 239 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134401; 14534-1_0239 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 239 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134401?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 426 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134400; 14534-1_0426 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 426 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134400?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 116 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134205; 14534-1_0116 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 116 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134205?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 329 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134199; 14534-1_0329 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 329 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134199?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 323 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134187; 14534-1_0323 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 323 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134187?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 361 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134155; 14534-1_0361 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 361 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134155?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 619 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134118; 14534-1_0619 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 619 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134118?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 350 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134101; 14534-1_0350 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 350 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134101?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 338 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134053; 14534-1_0338 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 338 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134053?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 594 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134038; 14534-1_0594 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 594 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134038?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 169 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134023; 14534-1_0169 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 169 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134023?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 229 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134012; 14534-1_0229 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 229 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134012?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 227 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134004; 14534-1_0227 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 227 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134004?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 167 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873134001; 14534-1_0167 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 167 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873134001?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 224 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133972; 14534-1_0224 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 224 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133972?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 106 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133969; 14534-1_0106 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 106 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133969?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 105 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133961; 14534-1_0105 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 105 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133961?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 305 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133958; 14534-1_0305 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 305 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133958?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 507 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133932; 14534-1_0507 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 507 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133932?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 103 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133930; 14534-1_0103 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 103 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133930?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 336 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133917; 14534-1_0336 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 336 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133917?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 260 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133912; 14534-1_0260 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 260 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133912?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 454 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133911; 14534-1_0454 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 454 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133911?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 100 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133908; 14534-1_0100 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 100 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133908?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=Simon&rft.date=2008-01-01&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=24&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Health+Policy+and+Planning&rft.issn=02681080&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093%2Fheapol%2Fczm041 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 450 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133888; 14534-1_0450 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 450 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133888?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 56 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133884; 14534-1_0056 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 56 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133884?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 449 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133878; 14534-1_0449 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 449 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133878?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 337 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133871; 14534-1_0337 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 337 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133871?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 210 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133867; 14534-1_0210 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 210 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133867?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 501 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133823; 14534-1_0501 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 501 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133823?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 150 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133806; 14534-1_0150 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 150 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133806?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 572 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133803; 14534-1_0572 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 572 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133803?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 204 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133791; 14534-1_0204 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 204 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133791?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 571 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133784; 14534-1_0571 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 571 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133784?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 566 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133761; 14534-1_0566 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 566 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133761?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 133 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133742; 14534-1_0133 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 133 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133742?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 85 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133664; 14534-1_0085 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 85 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133664?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 533 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133579; 14534-1_0533 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 533 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133579?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 532 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133568; 14534-1_0532 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 532 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133568?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 472 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133511; 14534-1_0472 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 472 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133511?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 158 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133433; 14534-1_0158 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 158 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133433?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 250 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133321; 14534-1_0250 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 250 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133321?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 419 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133298; 14534-1_0419 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 419 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133298?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 418 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133262; 14534-1_0418 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 418 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133262?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 201 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133244; 14534-1_0201 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 201 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133244?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 319 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133213; 14534-1_0319 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 319 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133213?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 137 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133199; 14534-1_0137 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 137 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133199?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 511 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133175; 14534-1_0511 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 511 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133175?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 526 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133165; 14534-1_0526 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 526 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133165?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 130 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133158; 14534-1_0130 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 130 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133158?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 556 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133127; 14534-1_0556 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 556 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133127?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 154 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873133100; 14534-1_0154 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 154 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133100?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 60 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132982; 14534-1_0060 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 60 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132982?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 263 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132980; 14534-1_0263 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 263 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132980?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 218 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132970; 14534-1_0218 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 218 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132970?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 382 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132927; 14534-1_0382 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 382 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132927?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 402 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132890; 14534-1_0402 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 402 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132890?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 311 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132845; 14534-1_0311 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 311 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132845?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 244 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132727; 14534-1_0244 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 244 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132727?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 477 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132686; 14534-1_0477 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 477 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132686?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 215 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132677; 14534-1_0215 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 215 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132677?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 41 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132670; 14525-1_0041 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 41 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132670?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 68 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132657; 14534-1_0068 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 68 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132657?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 40 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132655; 14525-1_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132655?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 39 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132627; 14525-1_0039 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 39 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132627?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 484 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132621; 14534-1_0484 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 484 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132621?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 38 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132620; 14525-1_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132620?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 15 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132609; 14525-1_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132609?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 6 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132571; 14525-1_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132571?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 401 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132548; 14534-1_0401 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 401 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132548?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 310 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132465; 14534-1_0310 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 310 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132465?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 399 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132445; 14534-1_0399 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 399 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132445?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 34 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132418; 14525-1_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132418?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 17 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132399; 14525-1_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132399?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 9 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132373; 14525-1_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132373?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 3 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132355; 14525-1_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132355?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 2 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132349; 14525-1_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132349?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 42 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132340; 14534-1_0042 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132340?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 475 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132308; 14534-1_0475 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 475 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132308?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 523 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132250; 14534-1_0523 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 523 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132250?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 138 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132228; 14534-1_0138 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 138 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132228?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 1 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132205; 14534-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132205?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 36 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132186; 14525-1_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132186?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 35 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132178; 14525-1_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132178?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 5 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132162; 14525-1_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132162?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 197 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132159; 14534-1_0197 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 197 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132159?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 196 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873132115; 14534-1_0196 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 196 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132115?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 26 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132113; 14525-1_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132113?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 25 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132101; 14525-1_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132101?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 21 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132066; 14525-1_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132066?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 18 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132055; 14525-1_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132055?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 11 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132049; 14525-1_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132049?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 10 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873132045; 14525-1_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132045?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 592 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873131926; 14534-1_0592 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 592 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131926?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 32 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873131770; 14534-1_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131770?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 198 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873131494; 14534-1_0198 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 198 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131494?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 11 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873131483; 14534-1_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131483?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 33 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873131464; 14525-1_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131464?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 29 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873131449; 14525-1_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131449?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 28 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873131442; 14525-1_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131442?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 27 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873131431; 14525-1_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131431?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 463 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873131430; 14534-1_0463 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 463 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131430?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 24 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873131413; 14525-1_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131413?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 31 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873131385; 14534-1_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131385?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 16 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873131359; 14525-1_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131359?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 508 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873130919; 14534-1_0508 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 508 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130919?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 14 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130807; 14525-1_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130807?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 12 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130784; 14525-1_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130784?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 23 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873130731; 14534-1_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130731?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 4 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130726; 14525-1_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130726?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 232 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873130505; 14534-1_0232 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 232 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130505?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 12 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873130482; 14534-1_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130482?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 31 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130462; 14525-1_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130462?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 30 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130451; 14525-1_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130451?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 43 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130429; 14525-1_0043 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 43 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130429?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 42 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130407; 14525-1_0042 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 42 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130407?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 37 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130380; 14525-1_0037 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130380?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 8 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130374; 14525-1_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130374?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 584 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873130298; 14534-1_0584 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 584 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130298?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 20 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130246; 14525-1_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130246?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 19 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873130197; 14525-1_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130197?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 27 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873129373; 14534-1_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129373?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 25 of 620] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT SECTION 4, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 873129201; 14534-1_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 27-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) to Bloomington is proposed. The corridor is the fourth portion of the federally approved 142-mile I-69 project and this draft EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of I-69 from Evansville to Indianapolis. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for I-69, are U.S. 231 in Greene County near Crane NSWC and SR 37 south of Bloomington in Monroe County. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to local access and public road connectivity, farmland impacts, and the location of interchange areas. The project corridor has been divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments. For each segment, two to three preliminary alternatives were developed and screened. Alternatives carried forward were identified and four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options are analyzed in detail in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 is the preferred alternative and would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. The initial design criteria cross section has two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, including a 60-foot median and five-foot wide usable inside shoulders, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. As with the initial design criteria cross section, additional right-of-way would be required beyond this footprint for cut and fill slopes, right-of-way maintenance, drainage, and right-of-way fencing. Including these elements, the average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $533 million using low-cost design criteria and at $798 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,458 to 1,830 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 468 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,098 acres of forest, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 53 acres of floodplain. Displacements would include 61 to 66 residences and four to five businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100281, Volume I--1,515 pages and maps, Appendices (Volume II)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Indiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129201?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. [Part 1 of 43] T2 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 873128005; 14525-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128005?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GUAM AND CNMI MILITARY RELOCATION, RELOCATING MARINES FROM OKINAWA, VISITING AIRCRAFT CARRIER BERTHING, AND ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE TASK FORCE, GUAM. AN - 755143347; 14525 AB - PURPOSE: The relocation of Marine Corps forces currently based in Okinawa, Japan to Guam, wharf reconstruction in Guam's Apra Harbor, and relocation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force (AMDTF) to Guam are proposed. Project locations include Guam and Tinian, both part of the Mariana Islands archipelago. The Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) military relocation actions are a complex, multi-service proposal involving components of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, as well as existing Air Force assets on Guam. Specifically, the actions would develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 8,600 Marines and their 9,000 dependents, construct a new deep-draft wharf with shoreside infrastructure improvements to support a transient nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and develop and construct facilities and infrastructure to support 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an AMDTF. Several action alternatives and a No Action Alternative for each of the proposed actions are evaluated in this final overseas EIS. Under the preferred main cantonment alternative, land parcels from Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station (NCTS) Finegayan,South Finegayan, and acquisition of Federal Aviation Administration land, would comprise one contiguous parcel of 2,580 acres for new facilities. Four sites are analyzed for the proposed Marine Corps airfield functions and Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) North Ramp is the only reasonable alternative. Apra Harbor is the only deep water port on the Island of Guam and is the only location with sufficient road, utility, and naval infrastructure to support a transient aircraft carrier berth. The preferred alternative is to construct a new deep-draft wharf at Polaris Point and to widen the existing outer Apra Harbor channel to 600 feet. However, selection of a specific site for the transient aircraft carrier berth within Apra Harbor is being deferred for the near term while additional data on marine resources in the harbor is collected. Of the geographic alternatives analyzed for the location of firing and non-firing training ranges, two reasonable alternatives on the east coast of Guam would require acquisition or lease of either 1,090 acres or 1,800 acres. The preferred alternative for training on Tinian would involve construction of four ranges within the leaseback area on the island. The preferred alternative for proposed AMDTF headquarters and housing would involve co-locating Army support facilities with the proposed Marine Corps units at NCTS Finegayan and the preferred alternative for munitions storage would involve construction of magazines at Andersen AFB. Utilities and roadways projects would include upgrades to power systems, potable water supplies, wastewater treatment facilities, and construction of roadway projects that could be partially funded by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects would include intersection improvements, bridge replacements, pavement strengthening, roadway relocation, and new road construction. Additional potable water capacity of 11.3 million gallons per day would be supplied by an estimated 22 new wells at Andersen AFB, rehabilitation of existing wells, and interconnection with the Guam Waterworks Authority water system. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed actions would position military forces within a timely response range to defend the homeland, Japan, and other allies' interests. The powerful U.S. presence in the Pacific region would provide the flexibility to respond to regional threats and would maintain regional stability, peace, and security. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary water quality impacts on near shore waters and significant direct impacts to the coral reef ecosystem would result from dredging in Apra Harbor. Roadway noise would be a significant impact in the north and central areas of Guam. Activities associated with the relocations would adversely affect 34 archaeological resources. Wastewater treatment facilities would require upgrades. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0346D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100271, Volumes 1-8--CD-ROM, Volume 9 (Appendices)--CD-ROM, Volume 10 (Public Comments)--CD-ROM (2, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Defense Programs KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Corals KW - Dredging KW - Harbor Improvements KW - Harbors KW - Islands KW - Leasing KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Military Facilities (Marine Corps) KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Military Operations (Army) KW - Military Operations (Marine Corps) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Munitions KW - Population KW - Roads KW - Ships KW - Water Supply KW - Wells KW - Andersen Air Force Base Guam KW - Apra Harbor Naval Complex KW - Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands KW - Guam KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/755143347?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.title=GUAM+AND+CNMI+MILITARY+RELOCATION%2C+RELOCATING+MARINES+FROM+OKINAWA%2C+VISITING+AIRCRAFT+CARRIER+BERTHING%2C+AND+ARMY+AIR+AND+MISSILE+DEFENSE+TASK+FORCE%2C+GUAM.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 755142748; 14533 AB - PURPOSE: The construction, operation, and reactivation of 20 miles of rail line in Clearfield and Centre counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. On May 20, 2008, R.J. Corman Railroad Company/Pennsylvania Lines Inc. (RJCP) filed a petition for an exemption from the prior approval requirements to construct and operate an abandoned 10.8-mile rail line between Wallaceton and Winburne in Clearfield County (the Western Segment) and to reactivate a connecting 9.3-mile portion of currently rail banked line between Winburne and Gorton in Clearfield and Centre Counties (the Eastern Segment). The proposed rail line would serve a new quarry, landfill, and industrial park currently being developed by Resource Recovery, LLC (RRLLC), near Gorton, Pennsylvania, as well as several other interested shippers along the line. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste by RJCP. Concerns voiced included the potential for odors, vermin/vectors for disease, containment during transport, leakage during transport, environmental damage/degradation associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS evaluates a No Action Alternative, a modified proposed action that would use an alternate route for a portion of the Western Segment, and a No-Build Alternative that would involve a local road system upgrade. The modified proposed action would entail continued use of RJCPs existing Wallaceton Subdivision line south of Wallaceton to a point near Philipsburg where a new connection would be built to another 5.8-mile abandoned rail line leading northeast to Munson (formerly referred to as the Philipsburg Industrial Track). Under either of the build alternatives, RJCP proposes to construct a single-track line on a 66-foot right-of-way over the approximately 20-mile project length and to operate common carrier service over the 20 miles of line. At peak capacity, RJCP anticipates that it would serve the RRLLC development and other local shippers with one or at most two unit trains daily. The local road system upgrade alternative would involve improving the existing local road system to accommodate the anticipated volume of truck traffic generated by RRLLCs proposed landfill/development site and interested shippers who would use the proposed rail line if it were available. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to a new quarry, landfill, and industrial park as well as to several other shippers. The proposed rail line could keep up to 1,100 trucks per day off the local road system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Reactivation of the rail banked Eastern Segment would result in the loss of approximately 9.3 miles of the Snow Shoe Multi-Use Rail Trail. Implementation of the modified proposed action would impact 3.36 acres of wetlands, cross five public roads and two private driveways, and create noise impacts to 32 sensitive receptors. LEGAL MANDATES: National Trails System Act of 1968. JF - EPA number: 100280, Volume 1--492 pages, Volume 2--151 maps, July 23, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Waste Management KW - Wetlands KW - Pennsylvania KW - National Trails System Act of 1968, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/755142748?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WRIGHT AREA COAL LEASE APPLICATIONS, CAMPBELL COUNTY, WYOMING. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - WRIGHT AREA COAL LEASE APPLICATIONS, CAMPBELL COUNTY, WYOMING. AN - 873130755; 14528-5_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The leasing of six tracts of federal coal reserves adjacent to the Black Thunder, Jacobs Ranch, and North Antelope Rochelle mines in Campbell County, Wyoming is proposed. All are operating surface coal mines in the southern Powder River Basin near the town of Wright. Ark Land Company, Jacobs Ranch Coal Company, and BTU Western Resources, Inc. filed four applications with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to lease the six tracts which would extend the life of the existing mines. These maintenance coal tracts are referred to as the North Hilight Field Lease by Application (LBA), the South Hilight Field LBA, the West Hilight Field LBA, the West Jacobs Ranch LBA, the North Porcupine LBA, and the South Porcupine LBA and comprise 18,022 acres containing 2.6 billion tons of federal coal. Concerns related to leasing coal and its subsequent development identified during analyses and scoping include: impacts to groundwater, air quality, wildlife, cultural resources, socioeconomics, loss of livestock grazing areas, conflicts with oil and gas development, cumulative impacts of ongoing surface mining, greenhouse gas emissions; ozone, and climate change. In addition to the proposed action, three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the LBA tracts would not be leased, but existing leases at the adjacent mines would be developed according to existing approved mining plans. Under Alternative 2, which is the preferred alternative, each of the six LBA tracts would be reconfigured by BLM in order to provide more efficient recovery of the federal coal, increase competitive interest, and reduce the potential that some of the remaining unleased federal coal would be bypassed in the future. Only the West Hilight Field LBA tract would be reconfigured under Alternative 3. In the event a lease is issued for an LBA tract, stipulations would be attached stating that no mining activity can be conducted in portions of the lease within public road or railroad rights-of-way and adjacent buffer zones unless authorized local authorities determine that the roads could be abandoned or relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternative 2 could add up to 7.8 years to the remaining life of the Black Thunder mine, up to 28.6 years to the remaining life of the Jacobs Ranch mine, and up to 8.2 years to the remaining life of the North Antelope Rochelle mine depending on potential road relocations and recovery of underlying coal. Up to 155 new employees could be added at the Jacobs Ranch mine. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Further mineral development would continue to impact habitat for sage-grouse and other birds. Mining would disturb the coal aquifer and the aquifers in the overburden above the coal within the Wright area LBA tracts. Access to 12,481 acres of federal grazing leases on Thunder Basin National Grassland surface would be suspended during mining and reclamation operations on five LBA tracts. Public exposure to emissions from surface mining operations could occur along roads and highways that pass through the areas of operations. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Coal Leasing Act Amendments of 1976, Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (P.L. 94-377), Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. 528 et seq.), and Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0241D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100275, Volume 1---719 pages, Volume 2 and Appendices---613 pages, July 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: BLM/WY/PL-10/022+1320 KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Coal KW - Emissions KW - Employment KW - Grazing KW - Mineral Resources KW - Mineral Resources Management KW - Mining KW - Railroads KW - Reclamation (Mining) KW - Roads KW - Water Quality KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Thunder Basin National Grassland KW - Wyoming KW - Federal Coal Leasing Act Amendments of 1976, Compliance KW - Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Compliance KW - Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, Compliance KW - Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960, Compliance KW - Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130755?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WRIGHT+AREA+COAL+LEASE+APPLICATIONS%2C+CAMPBELL+COUNTY%2C+WYOMING.&rft.title=WRIGHT+AREA+COAL+LEASE+APPLICATIONS%2C+CAMPBELL+COUNTY%2C+WYOMING.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper, Wyoming; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WRIGHT AREA COAL LEASE APPLICATIONS, CAMPBELL COUNTY, WYOMING. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - WRIGHT AREA COAL LEASE APPLICATIONS, CAMPBELL COUNTY, WYOMING. AN - 873130722; 14528-5_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The leasing of six tracts of federal coal reserves adjacent to the Black Thunder, Jacobs Ranch, and North Antelope Rochelle mines in Campbell County, Wyoming is proposed. All are operating surface coal mines in the southern Powder River Basin near the town of Wright. Ark Land Company, Jacobs Ranch Coal Company, and BTU Western Resources, Inc. filed four applications with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to lease the six tracts which would extend the life of the existing mines. These maintenance coal tracts are referred to as the North Hilight Field Lease by Application (LBA), the South Hilight Field LBA, the West Hilight Field LBA, the West Jacobs Ranch LBA, the North Porcupine LBA, and the South Porcupine LBA and comprise 18,022 acres containing 2.6 billion tons of federal coal. Concerns related to leasing coal and its subsequent development identified during analyses and scoping include: impacts to groundwater, air quality, wildlife, cultural resources, socioeconomics, loss of livestock grazing areas, conflicts with oil and gas development, cumulative impacts of ongoing surface mining, greenhouse gas emissions; ozone, and climate change. In addition to the proposed action, three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the LBA tracts would not be leased, but existing leases at the adjacent mines would be developed according to existing approved mining plans. Under Alternative 2, which is the preferred alternative, each of the six LBA tracts would be reconfigured by BLM in order to provide more efficient recovery of the federal coal, increase competitive interest, and reduce the potential that some of the remaining unleased federal coal would be bypassed in the future. Only the West Hilight Field LBA tract would be reconfigured under Alternative 3. In the event a lease is issued for an LBA tract, stipulations would be attached stating that no mining activity can be conducted in portions of the lease within public road or railroad rights-of-way and adjacent buffer zones unless authorized local authorities determine that the roads could be abandoned or relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternative 2 could add up to 7.8 years to the remaining life of the Black Thunder mine, up to 28.6 years to the remaining life of the Jacobs Ranch mine, and up to 8.2 years to the remaining life of the North Antelope Rochelle mine depending on potential road relocations and recovery of underlying coal. Up to 155 new employees could be added at the Jacobs Ranch mine. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Further mineral development would continue to impact habitat for sage-grouse and other birds. Mining would disturb the coal aquifer and the aquifers in the overburden above the coal within the Wright area LBA tracts. Access to 12,481 acres of federal grazing leases on Thunder Basin National Grassland surface would be suspended during mining and reclamation operations on five LBA tracts. Public exposure to emissions from surface mining operations could occur along roads and highways that pass through the areas of operations. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Coal Leasing Act Amendments of 1976, Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (P.L. 94-377), Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. 528 et seq.), and Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0241D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100275, Volume 1---719 pages, Volume 2 and Appendices---613 pages, July 22, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: BLM/WY/PL-10/022+1320 KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Coal KW - Emissions KW - Employment KW - Grazing KW - Mineral Resources KW - Mineral Resources Management KW - Mining KW - Railroads KW - Reclamation (Mining) KW - Roads KW - Water Quality KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Thunder Basin National Grassland KW - Wyoming KW - Federal Coal Leasing Act Amendments of 1976, Compliance KW - Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Compliance KW - Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, Compliance KW - Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960, Compliance KW - Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130722?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WRIGHT+AREA+COAL+LEASE+APPLICATIONS%2C+CAMPBELL+COUNTY%2C+WYOMING.&rft.title=WRIGHT+AREA+COAL+LEASE+APPLICATIONS%2C+CAMPBELL+COUNTY%2C+WYOMING.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper, Wyoming; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WRIGHT AREA COAL LEASE APPLICATIONS, CAMPBELL COUNTY, WYOMING. AN - 755143348; 14528 AB - PURPOSE: The leasing of six tracts of federal coal reserves adjacent to the Black Thunder, Jacobs Ranch, and North Antelope Rochelle mines in Campbell County, Wyoming is proposed. All are operating surface coal mines in the southern Powder River Basin near the town of Wright. Ark Land Company, Jacobs Ranch Coal Company, and BTU Western Resources, Inc. filed four applications with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to lease the six tracts which would extend the life of the existing mines. These maintenance coal tracts are referred to as the North Hilight Field Lease by Application (LBA), the South Hilight Field LBA, the West Hilight Field LBA, the West Jacobs Ranch LBA, the North Porcupine LBA, and the South Porcupine LBA and comprise 18,022 acres containing 2.6 billion tons of federal coal. Concerns related to leasing coal and its subsequent development identified during analyses and scoping include: impacts to groundwater, air quality, wildlife, cultural resources, socioeconomics, loss of livestock grazing areas, conflicts with oil and gas development, cumulative impacts of ongoing surface mining, greenhouse gas emissions; ozone, and climate change. In addition to the proposed action, three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered in this final EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the LBA tracts would not be leased, but existing leases at the adjacent mines would be developed according to existing approved mining plans. Under Alternative 2, which is the preferred alternative, each of the six LBA tracts would be reconfigured by BLM in order to provide more efficient recovery of the federal coal, increase competitive interest, and reduce the potential that some of the remaining unleased federal coal would be bypassed in the future. Only the West Hilight Field LBA tract would be reconfigured under Alternative 3. In the event a lease is issued for an LBA tract, stipulations would be attached stating that no mining activity can be conducted in portions of the lease within public road or railroad rights-of-way and adjacent buffer zones unless authorized local authorities determine that the roads could be abandoned or relocated. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternative 2 could add up to 7.8 years to the remaining life of the Black Thunder mine, up to 28.6 years to the remaining life of the Jacobs Ranch mine, and up to 8.2 years to the remaining life of the North Antelope Rochelle mine depending on potential road relocations and recovery of underlying coal. Up to 155 new employees could be added at the Jacobs Ranch mine. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Further mineral development would continue to impact habitat for sage-grouse and other birds. Mining would disturb the coal aquifer and the aquifers in the overburden above the coal within the Wright area LBA tracts. Access to 12,481 acres of federal grazing leases on Thunder Basin National Grassland surface would be suspended during mining and reclamation operations on five LBA tracts. Public exposure to emissions from surface mining operations could occur along roads and highways that pass through the areas of operations. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Coal Leasing Act Amendments of 1976, Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (P.L. 94-377), Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. 528 et seq.), and Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0241D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100275, Volume 1---719 pages, Volume 2 and Appendices---613 pages, July 22, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: BLM/WY/PL-10/022+1320 KW - Air Quality KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Coal KW - Emissions KW - Employment KW - Grazing KW - Mineral Resources KW - Mineral Resources Management KW - Mining KW - Railroads KW - Reclamation (Mining) KW - Roads KW - Water Quality KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Thunder Basin National Grassland KW - Wyoming KW - Federal Coal Leasing Act Amendments of 1976, Compliance KW - Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Compliance KW - Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, Compliance KW - Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960, Compliance KW - Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/755143348?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WRIGHT+AREA+COAL+LEASE+APPLICATIONS%2C+CAMPBELL+COUNTY%2C+WYOMING.&rft.title=WRIGHT+AREA+COAL+LEASE+APPLICATIONS%2C+CAMPBELL+COUNTY%2C+WYOMING.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Casper, Wyoming; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-14 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 34 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873132002; 14498-3_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132002?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 32 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131995; 14498-3_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131995?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 28 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131990; 14498-3_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131990?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 27 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131984; 14498-3_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131984?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 26 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131978; 14498-3_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131978?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 24 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131970; 14498-3_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131970?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 42 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131790; 14498-3_0042 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131790?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 41 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131781; 14498-3_0041 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131781?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 33 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131767; 14498-3_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131767?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 29 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131760; 14498-3_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131760?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 37 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131591; 14498-3_0037 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131591?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 30 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131577; 14498-3_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131577?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 22 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131560; 14498-3_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131560?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 21 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131312; 14498-3_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131312?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 20 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131297; 14498-3_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131297?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 8 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131165; 14498-3_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131165?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 7 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131159; 14498-3_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131159?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 6 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131150; 14498-3_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131150?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 5 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131138; 14498-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131138?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 19 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131127; 14498-3_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131127?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 4 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131125; 14498-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131125?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 23 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131124; 14498-3_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131124?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 18 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131113; 14498-3_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131113?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 17 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131019; 14498-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131019?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 16 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873131009; 14498-3_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131009?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 15 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130993; 14498-3_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130993?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 14 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130986; 14498-3_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130986?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 3 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130973; 14498-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130973?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 2 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130963; 14498-3_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130963?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 1 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130956; 14498-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130956?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 13 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130943; 14498-3_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130943?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 12 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130927; 14498-3_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130927?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 11 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130913; 14498-3_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130913?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 10 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130899; 14498-3_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130899?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 9 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130885; 14498-3_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130885?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 40 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130215; 14498-3_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130215?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 39 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130075; 14498-3_0039 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130075?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 38 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130051; 14498-3_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130051?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 25 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873130031; 14498-3_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130031?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 36 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873129644; 14498-3_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129644?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 35 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873129629; 14498-3_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129629?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. [Part 31 of 42] T2 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 873129611; 14498-3_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129611?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CIRC-WILLISTON TRANSPORTATION PROJECT, CHITTENDEN COUNTY, VERMONT. AN - 754907652; 14498 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of roadway improvements within the transportation corridor extending from Interstate 89 (I-89) and the towns of Williston and Essex and the Village of Essex Junction in Chitttenden County, Vermont is proposed. Existing and projected deficiencies within the corridor include traffic congestion, safety and mobility problems, and excessive truck traffic on local roads. The proposed Circ-Williston Transportation Project has resulted from numerous studies and planning documents regarding the improvement of transportation in and around Williston and Essex that were undertaken since the late 1950s, and a more recent scoping and alternatives screening analysis as part of this EIS process. Eleven alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The build alternatives are organized into three categories: the VT 2A alternatives, the Circ A/B alternatives, and the Hybrid alternatives. The VT 2A alternatives involve improvements to Vermont (VT) 2A from I-89 at Exit 12 in Williston to Five Corners in Essex Junction, including varying degrees of roadway widening, as well as intersection and roundabout improvements. The Circ A/B alternatives would involve the construction of a new roadway connecting I-89 in Williston to VT 289 in Essex within the existing Circ A/B rights-of-way. The Circ A/B alternatives would also require the construction of a new bridge over the Winooski River and interchange ramps to connect the new roadway to an existing interchange at the intersection of VT 289 and VT 117. The Hybrid Alternatives would combine widening and intersection improvements on VT 2A with a local street-type roadway in the Circ A right-of-way from I-89 to Mountain View Road. The preferred alternative (Alternative 17) is one of the Circ A/B alternatives and would involve the construction of a new four-lane boulevard, primarily in the Circ A/B corridor, connecting I-89 to VT 289. The facility would feature two travel lanes in each direction, separated by an eight to 16 foot wide raised median, and would include a trumpet interchange connection with I-89 in Williston, signalized intersections at US 2 and Mountain View Road, and a connection to VT 289 and VT 117 in Essex. The speed limit on the new roadway would be 40 mph. Estimated construction cost for the preferred alternative is $75.5 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Circ-Williston Transportation Project would improve access to, from, and, within the project area in northwestern Vermont. The new and improved facilities would relieve congestion at intersections and on roadway segment between intersections, improve safety, reduce truck traffic on local roads, and generally improve mobility. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require acquisition of 7.3 acres of farmland; four full and 11 partial property acquisitions; displacement of 59.1 acres of forested land and 21.8 acres of wetlands; and displacement of 5.17 acres of deer wintering habitat. Impacts to the rough avens, a federally protected plant species, could occur at the crossing of Allen Brook. Noise impacts would occur in the vicinity of 52 sensitive receptors. Visual aesthetics along the build corridors would be degraded, particularly in residential areas. Construction workers would likely encounter hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Surface Transportation Act of 1982, and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0393D, Volume 31, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100263, 789 pages and maps, CD-ROM, July 16, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VT-EIS-07-02-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Forests KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Vermont KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Surface Transportation Act of 1982, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754907652?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.title=CIRC-WILLISTON+TRANSPORTATION+PROJECT%2C+CHITTENDEN+COUNTY%2C+VERMONT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montpelier, Vermont; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 23 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876255082; 14504-9_0023 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255082?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 22 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876255077; 14504-9_0022 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255077?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 21 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876255074; 14504-9_0021 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255074?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 20 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876255070; 14504-9_0020 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255070?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 19 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876255064; 14504-9_0019 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255064?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 17 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876254155; 14504-9_0017 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254155?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 7 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252820; 14504-9_0007 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252820?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 6 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252819; 14504-9_0006 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252819?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 5 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252818; 14504-9_0005 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252818?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 4 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252817; 14504-9_0004 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252817?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 16 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252007; 14504-9_0016 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252007?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 18 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876251007; 14504-9_0018 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251007?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 3 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876246219; 14504-9_0003 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876246219?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 2 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876246208; 14504-9_0002 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876246208?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 1 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876246203; 14504-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876246203?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 13 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876245888; 14504-9_0013 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876245888?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 12 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876245882; 14504-9_0012 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876245882?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 11 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876245878; 14504-9_0011 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876245878?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 10 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876245868; 14504-9_0010 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876245868?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 9 of 23] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876245860; 14504-9_0009 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost-effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the mitigated preferred Alternative C, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Devils Lake Military Operations Area above 6,000 feet and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for an RPA transit corridor to link Grand Forks AFB to the Devils Lake RA. Alternative C would include the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0002D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100269, Executive Summary--22 pages, Final EIS--362 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876245860?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 22 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873131502; 14502-7_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131502?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 21 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873131493; 14502-7_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131493?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 20 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873131486; 14502-7_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131486?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 19 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873131478; 14502-7_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131478?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 16 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873131467; 14502-7_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131467?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 15 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873131463; 14502-7_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131463?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 14 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873131450; 14502-7_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131450?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 13 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873131447; 14502-7_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131447?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 12 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873130827; 14502-7_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130827?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 11 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873130819; 14502-7_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130819?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 10 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873130805; 14502-7_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130805?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 9 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873130797; 14502-7_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130797?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 8 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873130781; 14502-7_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130781?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 3 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873130775; 14502-7_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130775?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 2 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873130765; 14502-7_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130765?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 1 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873130756; 14502-7_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130756?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 18 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873129831; 14502-7_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129831?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 17 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873129818; 14502-7_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129818?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 7 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873129800; 14502-7_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129800?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 6 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873129786; 14502-7_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129786?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 5 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873129766; 14502-7_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129766?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 4 of 22] T2 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 873129750; 14502-7_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129750?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DRAPER TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 754907674; 14502 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of fixed-guideway, high-capacity, high-frequency transit service to the southernmost part of Salt Lake County, Utah is proposed. The Draper Transit Corridor Project 26.5-square-mile study area begins at the current end-of-the-line Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station of the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) North-South TRAX Light-Rail Transit line. The area is generally bounded on the north by 10000 South, on the east by 1300 East and then by a line about one mile east of the UTA-owned right-of-way, on the south by a line one mile south of 14600 South, and on the west by the western Draper city limit and the Jordan River. Located primarily in the cities of Sandy and Draper, the study area also includes parts of White City, South Jordan, and Bluffdale. Travel demands in 2030 are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system due to population and employment growth and new development. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and a transportation systems management alternative, are considered in this final EIS. Alternative C is the Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) alignment and the preferred alternative. It would extend the existing TRAX light-rail transit line from the Sandy Civic Center 10000 South Station along the right-of-way of the former Union Pacific Provo Industrial Lead Railroad, which crosses 10600 South, 11000 South, and 11400 South at grade. Immediately south of 11400 South, the alignment would curve slightly to the east, then run diagonally, crossing 700 East, 12000 South, and Draper Parkway at grade. A southern logical terminus for the MOS was determined to be Draper Town Center near 12400 South (Pioneer Road). The alignment would continue within the UTA-owned right-of-way and curve east to cross Pioneer Road at grade on a skew and terminate near the planned Draper Town Center at Pioneer Drive. The alignment would end at a tail track to be constructed south of the Pioneer Road (12400 South) crossing. The alternative includes three new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, and Draper Town Center). Alternative C, the Full Build Alternative, would continue south of Pioneer Road and terminate south of Highland Drive at 14600 South. The alternative would include five options for new stations with park-and-ride lots (11400 South, 11800 South, Draper Town Center, Highland, and 14600 South). Capital costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $212.2 million in year-of-expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would provide faster, more-reliable transit services than what could be achieved by operating buses in mixed-flow traffic. The proposed project would provide more-reliable mobility for transit-dependent people, including people of limited income, students, and retirees; encourage more pedestrian access to transit and less reliance on park-and-ride access at the existing end-of-the-line station; better serve reverse-peak travel movements for employment and educational access; serve rapidly developing areas; and decrease travel times to key urban area destinations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative, 15 acres of farmland would be converted to a transportation use. Three residences and up to three businesses would be relocated. Project noise levels would exceed moderate impact criteria at 114 residences and severe impact criteria at an additional 138 residences. Current short-range and mid-range views would change due to the addition of new elements, including light-rail tracks, cut-and-fill slopes, drainage structures, noise barriers, pavement, and lighting. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0134D, Volume 34, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100267, Final EIS (Volume 1)--733 pages, Appendices (Volume 2)--588 pages and maps, July 15, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Utah KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754907674?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=DRAPER+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-31 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 15, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - A Blueprint to Effective Enterprise Risk Management T2 - 20th International Symposium of the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE 2010) AN - 1312872971; 5992989 JF - 20th International Symposium of the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE 2010) AU - Kepchar, Kenneth Y1 - 2010/07/12/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Jul 12 KW - Risk management KW - Engineering drawings UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1312872971?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=20th+International+Symposium+of+the+International+Council+on+Systems+Engineering+%28INCOSE+2010%29&rft.atitle=A+Blueprint+to+Effective+Enterprise+Risk+Management&rft.au=Kepchar%2C+Kenneth&rft.aulast=Kepchar&rft.aufirst=Kenneth&rft.date=2010-07-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=20th+International+Symposium+of+the+International+Council+on+Systems+Engineering+%28INCOSE+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.incose.org/symp2010/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=52&Itemid=58 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 20 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131474; 14452-0_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131474?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 19 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131465; 14452-0_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131465?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 18 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131458; 14452-0_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131458?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 5 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131302; 14452-0_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131302?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 4 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131295; 14452-0_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131295?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 3 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131286; 14452-0_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131286?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 2 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131281; 14452-0_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131281?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 17 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131278; 14452-0_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131278?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 16 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131271; 14452-0_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131271?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 1 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131270; 14452-0_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131270?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 15 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131263; 14452-0_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131263?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 14 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131255; 14452-0_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131255?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 13 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873131241; 14452-0_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131241?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 10 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873129500; 14452-0_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129500?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 9 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873129467; 14452-0_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129467?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 8 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873129448; 14452-0_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129448?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 7 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873129356; 14452-0_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129356?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 6 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873129330; 14452-0_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129330?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 12 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873129262; 14452-0_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129262?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 11 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873129227; 14452-0_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129227?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 23 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873129069; 14452-0_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129069?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 22 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873129049; 14452-0_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129049?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 21 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 873129021; 14452-0_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129021?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 754907729; 14452 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Panel placement, transportation, visitor management, and temporal considerations formed the basis for the alternatives development process. For each of these four project components, a list of reasonable elements was developed and individual alternatives were assembled by combining one element of each component into an alternative package. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the proposed action (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. Pedestrian access to the exhibit would be limited to the Parkdale Viewing Center. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands Area of Critical Environmental Concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities associated with panel installation, including rail traffic, heavy equipment, and large rock drills, would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. An additional 84 acres would be disturbed at staging areas and visitor sites. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, an expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. JF - EPA number: 100260, Volume 1--415 pages, Volume 2--381 pages, Volume 3--491 pages, Volume 4--101 maps, July 9, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Urban and Social Programs KW - Agency number: DES 10-37 KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754907729?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. [Part 6 of 6] T2 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. AN - 873131802; 14451-9_0006 AB - PURPOSE: An airport improvement program for Theodore Francis Green Airport (T.F. Green Airport) which is located six miles south of Providence in Warwick, Rhode Island is proposed. The airport is owned by the State of Rhode Island and operated by the Rhode Island Airport Corporation. Designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport, T.F. Green Airport consists of two runways, a 352,000-square-foot passenger terminal building with 22 commercial air service gates, and associated facilities. Between 1990 and 2004, air passenger traffic at T.F. Green Airport grew by 132 percent from 2.37 million passengers in 1990 to 5.5 million in 2004. Despite the economic downturn beginning in 2009 and short-term projected decline in operations, long-term forecasts anticipate continued growth in air passenger traffic at the Airport and throughout the region. Air passenger demand at the Airport is predicted to reach approximately 6.7 million passengers by 2020 and 7.5 million passengers by 2025. The proposed program would improve Runway 16-34 safety areas, relocate Taxiway C, and demolish Hangar No. 1 to enhance safety. Efficiency improvements would include: an expanded passenger terminal, new ground support equipment facility, new belly cargo facility, a new fuel farm, new integrated cargo facility, expanded automobile parking, reconfigured terminal access roadways, and an extension of Runway 5-23 to 8,700 feet. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative B2, Runway 5-23 would be extended 600 feet north and 1,000 feet south for a total length of 8,700 feet, which would require construction of a partially relocated Airport Road in 2015 and a fully relocated Airport Road in 2020. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Tennessee Avenue. Alternative B4 was developed to minimize impacts to the residential communities and businesses, reduce mandatory land acquisition for construction, and avoid impacts to natural resources north of the Airport. Alternative B4 would extend Runway 5-23 south 1,500 feet for a total of 8,700 feet. Main Avenue would be realigned to the south at the Runway 5 end by 2015. Runway 16-34 would shift north 100 feet and Runway 16-34 safety improvements would require partial relocation of Airport Road at the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road by 2015. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Hasbrouck Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would enhance airport safety and efficiency to more fully meet current and anticipated demand for aviation services. Under both build alternatives, a number of intersections could have improved levels of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Alternative B2 would impact 7.5 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 773 linear feet of waterways, and 13.8 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland. Alternative B4 would impact 7.3 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 918 linear feet of waterways, and 7.4 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland area. Land acquisitions for Alternative B2 could total 261 residences and 38 businesses. For Alternative B4, acquisitions could total 121 residences and 12 businesses. Both alternatives would expose residential areas to a noise level of 65 decibels or higher requiring the land acquisitions and implementation of a sound insulation program. In 2015 and 2020, Alternative B4 would expose two non-residential noise-sensitive properties to a significant increase in noise levels and, in 2025, three non-residential noise-sensitive sites would experience a significant noise increase. Three historic architectural properties, one historic district, three archaeological sites, and six historic cemeteries would be impacted. Winslow Park, a 31.7-acre recreational area would be removed for safety reasons. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100259, Executive Summary--88 pages and maps, Draft EIS and Appendices--CD-ROM, July 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cemeteries KW - Demolition KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Rhode Island KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131802?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.title=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Burlington, Massachusetts; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. [Part 5 of 6] T2 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. AN - 873131786; 14451-9_0005 AB - PURPOSE: An airport improvement program for Theodore Francis Green Airport (T.F. Green Airport) which is located six miles south of Providence in Warwick, Rhode Island is proposed. The airport is owned by the State of Rhode Island and operated by the Rhode Island Airport Corporation. Designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport, T.F. Green Airport consists of two runways, a 352,000-square-foot passenger terminal building with 22 commercial air service gates, and associated facilities. Between 1990 and 2004, air passenger traffic at T.F. Green Airport grew by 132 percent from 2.37 million passengers in 1990 to 5.5 million in 2004. Despite the economic downturn beginning in 2009 and short-term projected decline in operations, long-term forecasts anticipate continued growth in air passenger traffic at the Airport and throughout the region. Air passenger demand at the Airport is predicted to reach approximately 6.7 million passengers by 2020 and 7.5 million passengers by 2025. The proposed program would improve Runway 16-34 safety areas, relocate Taxiway C, and demolish Hangar No. 1 to enhance safety. Efficiency improvements would include: an expanded passenger terminal, new ground support equipment facility, new belly cargo facility, a new fuel farm, new integrated cargo facility, expanded automobile parking, reconfigured terminal access roadways, and an extension of Runway 5-23 to 8,700 feet. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative B2, Runway 5-23 would be extended 600 feet north and 1,000 feet south for a total length of 8,700 feet, which would require construction of a partially relocated Airport Road in 2015 and a fully relocated Airport Road in 2020. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Tennessee Avenue. Alternative B4 was developed to minimize impacts to the residential communities and businesses, reduce mandatory land acquisition for construction, and avoid impacts to natural resources north of the Airport. Alternative B4 would extend Runway 5-23 south 1,500 feet for a total of 8,700 feet. Main Avenue would be realigned to the south at the Runway 5 end by 2015. Runway 16-34 would shift north 100 feet and Runway 16-34 safety improvements would require partial relocation of Airport Road at the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road by 2015. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Hasbrouck Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would enhance airport safety and efficiency to more fully meet current and anticipated demand for aviation services. Under both build alternatives, a number of intersections could have improved levels of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Alternative B2 would impact 7.5 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 773 linear feet of waterways, and 13.8 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland. Alternative B4 would impact 7.3 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 918 linear feet of waterways, and 7.4 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland area. Land acquisitions for Alternative B2 could total 261 residences and 38 businesses. For Alternative B4, acquisitions could total 121 residences and 12 businesses. Both alternatives would expose residential areas to a noise level of 65 decibels or higher requiring the land acquisitions and implementation of a sound insulation program. In 2015 and 2020, Alternative B4 would expose two non-residential noise-sensitive properties to a significant increase in noise levels and, in 2025, three non-residential noise-sensitive sites would experience a significant noise increase. Three historic architectural properties, one historic district, three archaeological sites, and six historic cemeteries would be impacted. Winslow Park, a 31.7-acre recreational area would be removed for safety reasons. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100259, Executive Summary--88 pages and maps, Draft EIS and Appendices--CD-ROM, July 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cemeteries KW - Demolition KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Rhode Island KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131786?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.title=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Burlington, Massachusetts; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. [Part 3 of 6] T2 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. AN - 873131776; 14451-9_0003 AB - PURPOSE: An airport improvement program for Theodore Francis Green Airport (T.F. Green Airport) which is located six miles south of Providence in Warwick, Rhode Island is proposed. The airport is owned by the State of Rhode Island and operated by the Rhode Island Airport Corporation. Designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport, T.F. Green Airport consists of two runways, a 352,000-square-foot passenger terminal building with 22 commercial air service gates, and associated facilities. Between 1990 and 2004, air passenger traffic at T.F. Green Airport grew by 132 percent from 2.37 million passengers in 1990 to 5.5 million in 2004. Despite the economic downturn beginning in 2009 and short-term projected decline in operations, long-term forecasts anticipate continued growth in air passenger traffic at the Airport and throughout the region. Air passenger demand at the Airport is predicted to reach approximately 6.7 million passengers by 2020 and 7.5 million passengers by 2025. The proposed program would improve Runway 16-34 safety areas, relocate Taxiway C, and demolish Hangar No. 1 to enhance safety. Efficiency improvements would include: an expanded passenger terminal, new ground support equipment facility, new belly cargo facility, a new fuel farm, new integrated cargo facility, expanded automobile parking, reconfigured terminal access roadways, and an extension of Runway 5-23 to 8,700 feet. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative B2, Runway 5-23 would be extended 600 feet north and 1,000 feet south for a total length of 8,700 feet, which would require construction of a partially relocated Airport Road in 2015 and a fully relocated Airport Road in 2020. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Tennessee Avenue. Alternative B4 was developed to minimize impacts to the residential communities and businesses, reduce mandatory land acquisition for construction, and avoid impacts to natural resources north of the Airport. Alternative B4 would extend Runway 5-23 south 1,500 feet for a total of 8,700 feet. Main Avenue would be realigned to the south at the Runway 5 end by 2015. Runway 16-34 would shift north 100 feet and Runway 16-34 safety improvements would require partial relocation of Airport Road at the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road by 2015. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Hasbrouck Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would enhance airport safety and efficiency to more fully meet current and anticipated demand for aviation services. Under both build alternatives, a number of intersections could have improved levels of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Alternative B2 would impact 7.5 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 773 linear feet of waterways, and 13.8 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland. Alternative B4 would impact 7.3 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 918 linear feet of waterways, and 7.4 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland area. Land acquisitions for Alternative B2 could total 261 residences and 38 businesses. For Alternative B4, acquisitions could total 121 residences and 12 businesses. Both alternatives would expose residential areas to a noise level of 65 decibels or higher requiring the land acquisitions and implementation of a sound insulation program. In 2015 and 2020, Alternative B4 would expose two non-residential noise-sensitive properties to a significant increase in noise levels and, in 2025, three non-residential noise-sensitive sites would experience a significant noise increase. Three historic architectural properties, one historic district, three archaeological sites, and six historic cemeteries would be impacted. Winslow Park, a 31.7-acre recreational area would be removed for safety reasons. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100259, Executive Summary--88 pages and maps, Draft EIS and Appendices--CD-ROM, July 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cemeteries KW - Demolition KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Rhode Island KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131776?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.title=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Burlington, Massachusetts; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. [Part 2 of 6] T2 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. AN - 873131756; 14451-9_0002 AB - PURPOSE: An airport improvement program for Theodore Francis Green Airport (T.F. Green Airport) which is located six miles south of Providence in Warwick, Rhode Island is proposed. The airport is owned by the State of Rhode Island and operated by the Rhode Island Airport Corporation. Designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport, T.F. Green Airport consists of two runways, a 352,000-square-foot passenger terminal building with 22 commercial air service gates, and associated facilities. Between 1990 and 2004, air passenger traffic at T.F. Green Airport grew by 132 percent from 2.37 million passengers in 1990 to 5.5 million in 2004. Despite the economic downturn beginning in 2009 and short-term projected decline in operations, long-term forecasts anticipate continued growth in air passenger traffic at the Airport and throughout the region. Air passenger demand at the Airport is predicted to reach approximately 6.7 million passengers by 2020 and 7.5 million passengers by 2025. The proposed program would improve Runway 16-34 safety areas, relocate Taxiway C, and demolish Hangar No. 1 to enhance safety. Efficiency improvements would include: an expanded passenger terminal, new ground support equipment facility, new belly cargo facility, a new fuel farm, new integrated cargo facility, expanded automobile parking, reconfigured terminal access roadways, and an extension of Runway 5-23 to 8,700 feet. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative B2, Runway 5-23 would be extended 600 feet north and 1,000 feet south for a total length of 8,700 feet, which would require construction of a partially relocated Airport Road in 2015 and a fully relocated Airport Road in 2020. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Tennessee Avenue. Alternative B4 was developed to minimize impacts to the residential communities and businesses, reduce mandatory land acquisition for construction, and avoid impacts to natural resources north of the Airport. Alternative B4 would extend Runway 5-23 south 1,500 feet for a total of 8,700 feet. Main Avenue would be realigned to the south at the Runway 5 end by 2015. Runway 16-34 would shift north 100 feet and Runway 16-34 safety improvements would require partial relocation of Airport Road at the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road by 2015. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Hasbrouck Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would enhance airport safety and efficiency to more fully meet current and anticipated demand for aviation services. Under both build alternatives, a number of intersections could have improved levels of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Alternative B2 would impact 7.5 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 773 linear feet of waterways, and 13.8 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland. Alternative B4 would impact 7.3 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 918 linear feet of waterways, and 7.4 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland area. Land acquisitions for Alternative B2 could total 261 residences and 38 businesses. For Alternative B4, acquisitions could total 121 residences and 12 businesses. Both alternatives would expose residential areas to a noise level of 65 decibels or higher requiring the land acquisitions and implementation of a sound insulation program. In 2015 and 2020, Alternative B4 would expose two non-residential noise-sensitive properties to a significant increase in noise levels and, in 2025, three non-residential noise-sensitive sites would experience a significant noise increase. Three historic architectural properties, one historic district, three archaeological sites, and six historic cemeteries would be impacted. Winslow Park, a 31.7-acre recreational area would be removed for safety reasons. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100259, Executive Summary--88 pages and maps, Draft EIS and Appendices--CD-ROM, July 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cemeteries KW - Demolition KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Rhode Island KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131756?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.title=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Burlington, Massachusetts; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. [Part 4 of 6] T2 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. AN - 873131571; 14451-9_0004 AB - PURPOSE: An airport improvement program for Theodore Francis Green Airport (T.F. Green Airport) which is located six miles south of Providence in Warwick, Rhode Island is proposed. The airport is owned by the State of Rhode Island and operated by the Rhode Island Airport Corporation. Designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport, T.F. Green Airport consists of two runways, a 352,000-square-foot passenger terminal building with 22 commercial air service gates, and associated facilities. Between 1990 and 2004, air passenger traffic at T.F. Green Airport grew by 132 percent from 2.37 million passengers in 1990 to 5.5 million in 2004. Despite the economic downturn beginning in 2009 and short-term projected decline in operations, long-term forecasts anticipate continued growth in air passenger traffic at the Airport and throughout the region. Air passenger demand at the Airport is predicted to reach approximately 6.7 million passengers by 2020 and 7.5 million passengers by 2025. The proposed program would improve Runway 16-34 safety areas, relocate Taxiway C, and demolish Hangar No. 1 to enhance safety. Efficiency improvements would include: an expanded passenger terminal, new ground support equipment facility, new belly cargo facility, a new fuel farm, new integrated cargo facility, expanded automobile parking, reconfigured terminal access roadways, and an extension of Runway 5-23 to 8,700 feet. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative B2, Runway 5-23 would be extended 600 feet north and 1,000 feet south for a total length of 8,700 feet, which would require construction of a partially relocated Airport Road in 2015 and a fully relocated Airport Road in 2020. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Tennessee Avenue. Alternative B4 was developed to minimize impacts to the residential communities and businesses, reduce mandatory land acquisition for construction, and avoid impacts to natural resources north of the Airport. Alternative B4 would extend Runway 5-23 south 1,500 feet for a total of 8,700 feet. Main Avenue would be realigned to the south at the Runway 5 end by 2015. Runway 16-34 would shift north 100 feet and Runway 16-34 safety improvements would require partial relocation of Airport Road at the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road by 2015. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Hasbrouck Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would enhance airport safety and efficiency to more fully meet current and anticipated demand for aviation services. Under both build alternatives, a number of intersections could have improved levels of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Alternative B2 would impact 7.5 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 773 linear feet of waterways, and 13.8 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland. Alternative B4 would impact 7.3 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 918 linear feet of waterways, and 7.4 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland area. Land acquisitions for Alternative B2 could total 261 residences and 38 businesses. For Alternative B4, acquisitions could total 121 residences and 12 businesses. Both alternatives would expose residential areas to a noise level of 65 decibels or higher requiring the land acquisitions and implementation of a sound insulation program. In 2015 and 2020, Alternative B4 would expose two non-residential noise-sensitive properties to a significant increase in noise levels and, in 2025, three non-residential noise-sensitive sites would experience a significant noise increase. Three historic architectural properties, one historic district, three archaeological sites, and six historic cemeteries would be impacted. Winslow Park, a 31.7-acre recreational area would be removed for safety reasons. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100259, Executive Summary--88 pages and maps, Draft EIS and Appendices--CD-ROM, July 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cemeteries KW - Demolition KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Rhode Island KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131571?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.title=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Burlington, Massachusetts; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. [Part 1 of 6] T2 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. AN - 873129346; 14451-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: An airport improvement program for Theodore Francis Green Airport (T.F. Green Airport) which is located six miles south of Providence in Warwick, Rhode Island is proposed. The airport is owned by the State of Rhode Island and operated by the Rhode Island Airport Corporation. Designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport, T.F. Green Airport consists of two runways, a 352,000-square-foot passenger terminal building with 22 commercial air service gates, and associated facilities. Between 1990 and 2004, air passenger traffic at T.F. Green Airport grew by 132 percent from 2.37 million passengers in 1990 to 5.5 million in 2004. Despite the economic downturn beginning in 2009 and short-term projected decline in operations, long-term forecasts anticipate continued growth in air passenger traffic at the Airport and throughout the region. Air passenger demand at the Airport is predicted to reach approximately 6.7 million passengers by 2020 and 7.5 million passengers by 2025. The proposed program would improve Runway 16-34 safety areas, relocate Taxiway C, and demolish Hangar No. 1 to enhance safety. Efficiency improvements would include: an expanded passenger terminal, new ground support equipment facility, new belly cargo facility, a new fuel farm, new integrated cargo facility, expanded automobile parking, reconfigured terminal access roadways, and an extension of Runway 5-23 to 8,700 feet. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative B2, Runway 5-23 would be extended 600 feet north and 1,000 feet south for a total length of 8,700 feet, which would require construction of a partially relocated Airport Road in 2015 and a fully relocated Airport Road in 2020. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Tennessee Avenue. Alternative B4 was developed to minimize impacts to the residential communities and businesses, reduce mandatory land acquisition for construction, and avoid impacts to natural resources north of the Airport. Alternative B4 would extend Runway 5-23 south 1,500 feet for a total of 8,700 feet. Main Avenue would be realigned to the south at the Runway 5 end by 2015. Runway 16-34 would shift north 100 feet and Runway 16-34 safety improvements would require partial relocation of Airport Road at the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road by 2015. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Hasbrouck Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would enhance airport safety and efficiency to more fully meet current and anticipated demand for aviation services. Under both build alternatives, a number of intersections could have improved levels of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Alternative B2 would impact 7.5 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 773 linear feet of waterways, and 13.8 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland. Alternative B4 would impact 7.3 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 918 linear feet of waterways, and 7.4 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland area. Land acquisitions for Alternative B2 could total 261 residences and 38 businesses. For Alternative B4, acquisitions could total 121 residences and 12 businesses. Both alternatives would expose residential areas to a noise level of 65 decibels or higher requiring the land acquisitions and implementation of a sound insulation program. In 2015 and 2020, Alternative B4 would expose two non-residential noise-sensitive properties to a significant increase in noise levels and, in 2025, three non-residential noise-sensitive sites would experience a significant noise increase. Three historic architectural properties, one historic district, three archaeological sites, and six historic cemeteries would be impacted. Winslow Park, a 31.7-acre recreational area would be removed for safety reasons. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100259, Executive Summary--88 pages and maps, Draft EIS and Appendices--CD-ROM, July 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cemeteries KW - Demolition KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Rhode Island KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129346?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.title=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Burlington, Massachusetts; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, CITY OF WARWICK, KENT COUNTY, RHODE ISLAND. AN - 754909714; 14451 AB - PURPOSE: An airport improvement program for Theodore Francis Green Airport (T.F. Green Airport) which is located six miles south of Providence in Warwick, Rhode Island is proposed. The airport is owned by the State of Rhode Island and operated by the Rhode Island Airport Corporation. Designated as a medium-hub primary commercial service airport, T.F. Green Airport consists of two runways, a 352,000-square-foot passenger terminal building with 22 commercial air service gates, and associated facilities. Between 1990 and 2004, air passenger traffic at T.F. Green Airport grew by 132 percent from 2.37 million passengers in 1990 to 5.5 million in 2004. Despite the economic downturn beginning in 2009 and short-term projected decline in operations, long-term forecasts anticipate continued growth in air passenger traffic at the Airport and throughout the region. Air passenger demand at the Airport is predicted to reach approximately 6.7 million passengers by 2020 and 7.5 million passengers by 2025. The proposed program would improve Runway 16-34 safety areas, relocate Taxiway C, and demolish Hangar No. 1 to enhance safety. Efficiency improvements would include: an expanded passenger terminal, new ground support equipment facility, new belly cargo facility, a new fuel farm, new integrated cargo facility, expanded automobile parking, reconfigured terminal access roadways, and an extension of Runway 5-23 to 8,700 feet. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative B2, Runway 5-23 would be extended 600 feet north and 1,000 feet south for a total length of 8,700 feet, which would require construction of a partially relocated Airport Road in 2015 and a fully relocated Airport Road in 2020. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Tennessee Avenue. Alternative B4 was developed to minimize impacts to the residential communities and businesses, reduce mandatory land acquisition for construction, and avoid impacts to natural resources north of the Airport. Alternative B4 would extend Runway 5-23 south 1,500 feet for a total of 8,700 feet. Main Avenue would be realigned to the south at the Runway 5 end by 2015. Runway 16-34 would shift north 100 feet and Runway 16-34 safety improvements would require partial relocation of Airport Road at the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road by 2015. The construction would shift the intersection of Post Road and Airport Road north to Hasbrouck Avenue. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would enhance airport safety and efficiency to more fully meet current and anticipated demand for aviation services. Under both build alternatives, a number of intersections could have improved levels of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Alternative B2 would impact 7.5 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 773 linear feet of waterways, and 13.8 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland. Alternative B4 would impact 7.3 acres of federal-jurisdictional wetlands, 918 linear feet of waterways, and 7.4 acres of perimeter and riverbank wetland area. Land acquisitions for Alternative B2 could total 261 residences and 38 businesses. For Alternative B4, acquisitions could total 121 residences and 12 businesses. Both alternatives would expose residential areas to a noise level of 65 decibels or higher requiring the land acquisitions and implementation of a sound insulation program. In 2015 and 2020, Alternative B4 would expose two non-residential noise-sensitive properties to a significant increase in noise levels and, in 2025, three non-residential noise-sensitive sites would experience a significant noise increase. Three historic architectural properties, one historic district, three archaeological sites, and six historic cemeteries would be impacted. Winslow Park, a 31.7-acre recreational area would be removed for safety reasons. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100259, Executive Summary--88 pages and maps, Draft EIS and Appendices--CD-ROM, July 8, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cemeteries KW - Demolition KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Rhode Island KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754909714?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.title=THEODORE+FRANCIS+GREEN+AIRPORT+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+CITY+OF+WARWICK%2C+KENT+COUNTY%2C+RHODE+ISLAND.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Burlington, Massachusetts; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 30 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873132253; 14443-1_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132253?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 29 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873132244; 14443-1_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132244?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 14 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873132234; 14443-1_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132234?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 13 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873132225; 14443-1_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132225?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 67 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131432; 14443-1_0067 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 67 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131432?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 66 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131411; 14443-1_0066 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 66 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131411?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 65 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131393; 14443-1_0065 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 65 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131393?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 52 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131372; 14443-1_0052 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 52 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131372?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 51 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131361; 14443-1_0051 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 51 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131361?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 50 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131347; 14443-1_0050 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 50 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131347?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 44 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131328; 14443-1_0044 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131328?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 24 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131301; 14443-1_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131301?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 68 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131233; 14443-1_0068 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 68 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131233?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 56 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131216; 14443-1_0056 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 56 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131216?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 55 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131206; 14443-1_0055 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 55 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131206?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 54 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131199; 14443-1_0054 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 54 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131199?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 59 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131197; 14443-1_0059 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 59 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131197?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 53 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131184; 14443-1_0053 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 53 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131184?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 58 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131181; 14443-1_0058 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 58 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131181?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 42 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131171; 14443-1_0042 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131171?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 57 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131164; 14443-1_0057 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 57 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131164?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 26 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131162; 14443-1_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131162?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 25 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131154; 14443-1_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131154?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 37 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131087; 14443-1_0037 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131087?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 36 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131070; 14443-1_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131070?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 17 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131051; 14443-1_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131051?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 5 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131027; 14443-1_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131027?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 4 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873131010; 14443-1_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131010?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 3 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130998; 14443-1_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130998?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 41 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130992; 14443-1_0041 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130992?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 2 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130985; 14443-1_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130985?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 40 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130981; 14443-1_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130981?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 39 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130968; 14443-1_0039 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130968?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 28 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130962; 14443-1_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130962?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 27 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130951; 14443-1_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130951?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 18 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130929; 14443-1_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130929?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 12 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130912; 14443-1_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130912?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 11 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130898; 14443-1_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130898?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 1 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873130796; 14443-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130796?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 49 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873129307; 14443-1_0049 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 49 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129307?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 48 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873129272; 14443-1_0048 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 48 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129272?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 47 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873129232; 14443-1_0047 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 47 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129232?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 23 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873129198; 14443-1_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129198?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 22 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873129175; 14443-1_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129175?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 21 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873129150; 14443-1_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129150?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 64 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873129000; 14443-1_0064 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 64 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129000?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 63 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873128981; 14443-1_0063 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 63 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128981?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 62 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873128956; 14443-1_0062 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 62 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128956?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 61 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873128931; 14443-1_0061 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 61 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128931?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 10 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873128339; 14443-1_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128339?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 8 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873128325; 14443-1_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128325?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 7 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873128317; 14443-1_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128317?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 6 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873128308; 14443-1_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128308?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 43 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873127257; 14443-1_0043 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127257?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 35 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873127251; 14443-1_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127251?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 34 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873127249; 14443-1_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127249?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 33 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873127243; 14443-1_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127243?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 20 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873127232; 14443-1_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127232?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 15 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873127224; 14443-1_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127224?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). [Part 46 of 68] T2 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 873126937; 14443-1_0046 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126937?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 7] T2 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 816526993; 14441-100249_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to Interstate 5 (I-5) from La Jolla Village Drive in the City of San Diego to Harbor Boulevard in the City of Oceanside, California are proposed. Located in San Diego Countys north coastal area, the I-5 North Coast Corridors 27 miles of highway connects the cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar and San Diego. As a gateway to San Diego County, the I-5 North Coast Corridor is one of the most traveled highways in the nation. It carries locals and visitors to attractions such as its six lagoons, world-renowned beaches, Legoland and Del Mar Fairgrounds, employment centers, and communities. For most of the project area, there have been minimal improvements to the existing interstate facility since the original construction during the 1960's and 1970's and the corridor currently experiences periodic traffic congestion during weekday peak hours. The proposed improvements would include one or two high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) managed lanes in each direction, auxiliary lanes where needed, and possibly one general purpose lane in each direction. The HOV/managed lanes would be available for carpools, vanpools, busses at no cost and be available to single-occupant vehicles for a fee when there is sufficient capacity. Four build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are assessed in this draft EIS. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a concrete barrier using standard 10-foot shoulder widths. There would be would a buffer separating HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a four-foot and variable buffer width in lieu of the barrier from Voigt Drive to Del Mar Heights Road and from SR-78 to Harbor Drive /Vandegrift Boulevard. A total of four HOV/managed lanes would be built from north of the freeway-to-freeway connector in San Diego to Harbor Drive/Vandegrift in Oceanside. There would be two HOV/managed lanes from Voigt Drive in San Diego to the freeway-to-freeway connector. New freeway access at Voigt Drive, Manchester Avenue, Cannon Road and Oceanside Boulevard would be constructed. In addition, one general-purpose lane would be constructed in each direction on I-5 from south of Del Mar Heights Road in San Diego to SR-78 in Oceanside. There would be auxiliary lanes constructed at various locations within the project area and operational improvements. The 10+4 with Buffer Alternative would function similarly, but would use a buffer to separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a width of four feet in some locations instead of the barrier. The 8+4 with Barrier and the 8+4 with Buffer alternatives would be similar, but would not include the additional general-purpose lanes. Cost estimates for the build alternatives range from $3.3 billion to $4.3 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service, provide a facility that is compatible with future bus rapid transit and other modal options, provide consistency with the regional transportation plan, and maintain I-5 as an effective link in the national strategic highway network. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would impact 24 to 27 acres of farmland and 23 to 29 acres of federal wetlands, impact two archaeological sites, and require relocations of 50 to 112 residences and 10 to 13 businesses. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would displace a 47-unit apartment complex in northern Carlsbad within an area identified as having a high concentration of Spanish-speaking households as well as a high proportion of minority populations. All four build alternatives would result in highly adverse changes to the existing visual environment along the project corridor, making it noticeably more urban. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100249, 585 oversize pages and maps, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526993?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 7] T2 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 816526988; 14441-100249_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to Interstate 5 (I-5) from La Jolla Village Drive in the City of San Diego to Harbor Boulevard in the City of Oceanside, California are proposed. Located in San Diego Countys north coastal area, the I-5 North Coast Corridors 27 miles of highway connects the cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar and San Diego. As a gateway to San Diego County, the I-5 North Coast Corridor is one of the most traveled highways in the nation. It carries locals and visitors to attractions such as its six lagoons, world-renowned beaches, Legoland and Del Mar Fairgrounds, employment centers, and communities. For most of the project area, there have been minimal improvements to the existing interstate facility since the original construction during the 1960's and 1970's and the corridor currently experiences periodic traffic congestion during weekday peak hours. The proposed improvements would include one or two high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) managed lanes in each direction, auxiliary lanes where needed, and possibly one general purpose lane in each direction. The HOV/managed lanes would be available for carpools, vanpools, busses at no cost and be available to single-occupant vehicles for a fee when there is sufficient capacity. Four build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are assessed in this draft EIS. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a concrete barrier using standard 10-foot shoulder widths. There would be would a buffer separating HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a four-foot and variable buffer width in lieu of the barrier from Voigt Drive to Del Mar Heights Road and from SR-78 to Harbor Drive /Vandegrift Boulevard. A total of four HOV/managed lanes would be built from north of the freeway-to-freeway connector in San Diego to Harbor Drive/Vandegrift in Oceanside. There would be two HOV/managed lanes from Voigt Drive in San Diego to the freeway-to-freeway connector. New freeway access at Voigt Drive, Manchester Avenue, Cannon Road and Oceanside Boulevard would be constructed. In addition, one general-purpose lane would be constructed in each direction on I-5 from south of Del Mar Heights Road in San Diego to SR-78 in Oceanside. There would be auxiliary lanes constructed at various locations within the project area and operational improvements. The 10+4 with Buffer Alternative would function similarly, but would use a buffer to separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a width of four feet in some locations instead of the barrier. The 8+4 with Barrier and the 8+4 with Buffer alternatives would be similar, but would not include the additional general-purpose lanes. Cost estimates for the build alternatives range from $3.3 billion to $4.3 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service, provide a facility that is compatible with future bus rapid transit and other modal options, provide consistency with the regional transportation plan, and maintain I-5 as an effective link in the national strategic highway network. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would impact 24 to 27 acres of farmland and 23 to 29 acres of federal wetlands, impact two archaeological sites, and require relocations of 50 to 112 residences and 10 to 13 businesses. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would displace a 47-unit apartment complex in northern Carlsbad within an area identified as having a high concentration of Spanish-speaking households as well as a high proportion of minority populations. All four build alternatives would result in highly adverse changes to the existing visual environment along the project corridor, making it noticeably more urban. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100249, 585 oversize pages and maps, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526988?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 7] T2 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 816526967; 14441-100249_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to Interstate 5 (I-5) from La Jolla Village Drive in the City of San Diego to Harbor Boulevard in the City of Oceanside, California are proposed. Located in San Diego Countys north coastal area, the I-5 North Coast Corridors 27 miles of highway connects the cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar and San Diego. As a gateway to San Diego County, the I-5 North Coast Corridor is one of the most traveled highways in the nation. It carries locals and visitors to attractions such as its six lagoons, world-renowned beaches, Legoland and Del Mar Fairgrounds, employment centers, and communities. For most of the project area, there have been minimal improvements to the existing interstate facility since the original construction during the 1960's and 1970's and the corridor currently experiences periodic traffic congestion during weekday peak hours. The proposed improvements would include one or two high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) managed lanes in each direction, auxiliary lanes where needed, and possibly one general purpose lane in each direction. The HOV/managed lanes would be available for carpools, vanpools, busses at no cost and be available to single-occupant vehicles for a fee when there is sufficient capacity. Four build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are assessed in this draft EIS. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a concrete barrier using standard 10-foot shoulder widths. There would be would a buffer separating HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a four-foot and variable buffer width in lieu of the barrier from Voigt Drive to Del Mar Heights Road and from SR-78 to Harbor Drive /Vandegrift Boulevard. A total of four HOV/managed lanes would be built from north of the freeway-to-freeway connector in San Diego to Harbor Drive/Vandegrift in Oceanside. There would be two HOV/managed lanes from Voigt Drive in San Diego to the freeway-to-freeway connector. New freeway access at Voigt Drive, Manchester Avenue, Cannon Road and Oceanside Boulevard would be constructed. In addition, one general-purpose lane would be constructed in each direction on I-5 from south of Del Mar Heights Road in San Diego to SR-78 in Oceanside. There would be auxiliary lanes constructed at various locations within the project area and operational improvements. The 10+4 with Buffer Alternative would function similarly, but would use a buffer to separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a width of four feet in some locations instead of the barrier. The 8+4 with Barrier and the 8+4 with Buffer alternatives would be similar, but would not include the additional general-purpose lanes. Cost estimates for the build alternatives range from $3.3 billion to $4.3 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service, provide a facility that is compatible with future bus rapid transit and other modal options, provide consistency with the regional transportation plan, and maintain I-5 as an effective link in the national strategic highway network. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would impact 24 to 27 acres of farmland and 23 to 29 acres of federal wetlands, impact two archaeological sites, and require relocations of 50 to 112 residences and 10 to 13 businesses. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would displace a 47-unit apartment complex in northern Carlsbad within an area identified as having a high concentration of Spanish-speaking households as well as a high proportion of minority populations. All four build alternatives would result in highly adverse changes to the existing visual environment along the project corridor, making it noticeably more urban. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100249, 585 oversize pages and maps, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526967?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 7] T2 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 816526961; 14441-100249_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to Interstate 5 (I-5) from La Jolla Village Drive in the City of San Diego to Harbor Boulevard in the City of Oceanside, California are proposed. Located in San Diego Countys north coastal area, the I-5 North Coast Corridors 27 miles of highway connects the cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar and San Diego. As a gateway to San Diego County, the I-5 North Coast Corridor is one of the most traveled highways in the nation. It carries locals and visitors to attractions such as its six lagoons, world-renowned beaches, Legoland and Del Mar Fairgrounds, employment centers, and communities. For most of the project area, there have been minimal improvements to the existing interstate facility since the original construction during the 1960's and 1970's and the corridor currently experiences periodic traffic congestion during weekday peak hours. The proposed improvements would include one or two high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) managed lanes in each direction, auxiliary lanes where needed, and possibly one general purpose lane in each direction. The HOV/managed lanes would be available for carpools, vanpools, busses at no cost and be available to single-occupant vehicles for a fee when there is sufficient capacity. Four build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are assessed in this draft EIS. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a concrete barrier using standard 10-foot shoulder widths. There would be would a buffer separating HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a four-foot and variable buffer width in lieu of the barrier from Voigt Drive to Del Mar Heights Road and from SR-78 to Harbor Drive /Vandegrift Boulevard. A total of four HOV/managed lanes would be built from north of the freeway-to-freeway connector in San Diego to Harbor Drive/Vandegrift in Oceanside. There would be two HOV/managed lanes from Voigt Drive in San Diego to the freeway-to-freeway connector. New freeway access at Voigt Drive, Manchester Avenue, Cannon Road and Oceanside Boulevard would be constructed. In addition, one general-purpose lane would be constructed in each direction on I-5 from south of Del Mar Heights Road in San Diego to SR-78 in Oceanside. There would be auxiliary lanes constructed at various locations within the project area and operational improvements. The 10+4 with Buffer Alternative would function similarly, but would use a buffer to separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a width of four feet in some locations instead of the barrier. The 8+4 with Barrier and the 8+4 with Buffer alternatives would be similar, but would not include the additional general-purpose lanes. Cost estimates for the build alternatives range from $3.3 billion to $4.3 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service, provide a facility that is compatible with future bus rapid transit and other modal options, provide consistency with the regional transportation plan, and maintain I-5 as an effective link in the national strategic highway network. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would impact 24 to 27 acres of farmland and 23 to 29 acres of federal wetlands, impact two archaeological sites, and require relocations of 50 to 112 residences and 10 to 13 businesses. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would displace a 47-unit apartment complex in northern Carlsbad within an area identified as having a high concentration of Spanish-speaking households as well as a high proportion of minority populations. All four build alternatives would result in highly adverse changes to the existing visual environment along the project corridor, making it noticeably more urban. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100249, 585 oversize pages and maps, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526961?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 7] T2 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 816526954; 14441-100249_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to Interstate 5 (I-5) from La Jolla Village Drive in the City of San Diego to Harbor Boulevard in the City of Oceanside, California are proposed. Located in San Diego Countys north coastal area, the I-5 North Coast Corridors 27 miles of highway connects the cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar and San Diego. As a gateway to San Diego County, the I-5 North Coast Corridor is one of the most traveled highways in the nation. It carries locals and visitors to attractions such as its six lagoons, world-renowned beaches, Legoland and Del Mar Fairgrounds, employment centers, and communities. For most of the project area, there have been minimal improvements to the existing interstate facility since the original construction during the 1960's and 1970's and the corridor currently experiences periodic traffic congestion during weekday peak hours. The proposed improvements would include one or two high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) managed lanes in each direction, auxiliary lanes where needed, and possibly one general purpose lane in each direction. The HOV/managed lanes would be available for carpools, vanpools, busses at no cost and be available to single-occupant vehicles for a fee when there is sufficient capacity. Four build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are assessed in this draft EIS. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a concrete barrier using standard 10-foot shoulder widths. There would be would a buffer separating HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a four-foot and variable buffer width in lieu of the barrier from Voigt Drive to Del Mar Heights Road and from SR-78 to Harbor Drive /Vandegrift Boulevard. A total of four HOV/managed lanes would be built from north of the freeway-to-freeway connector in San Diego to Harbor Drive/Vandegrift in Oceanside. There would be two HOV/managed lanes from Voigt Drive in San Diego to the freeway-to-freeway connector. New freeway access at Voigt Drive, Manchester Avenue, Cannon Road and Oceanside Boulevard would be constructed. In addition, one general-purpose lane would be constructed in each direction on I-5 from south of Del Mar Heights Road in San Diego to SR-78 in Oceanside. There would be auxiliary lanes constructed at various locations within the project area and operational improvements. The 10+4 with Buffer Alternative would function similarly, but would use a buffer to separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a width of four feet in some locations instead of the barrier. The 8+4 with Barrier and the 8+4 with Buffer alternatives would be similar, but would not include the additional general-purpose lanes. Cost estimates for the build alternatives range from $3.3 billion to $4.3 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service, provide a facility that is compatible with future bus rapid transit and other modal options, provide consistency with the regional transportation plan, and maintain I-5 as an effective link in the national strategic highway network. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would impact 24 to 27 acres of farmland and 23 to 29 acres of federal wetlands, impact two archaeological sites, and require relocations of 50 to 112 residences and 10 to 13 businesses. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would displace a 47-unit apartment complex in northern Carlsbad within an area identified as having a high concentration of Spanish-speaking households as well as a high proportion of minority populations. All four build alternatives would result in highly adverse changes to the existing visual environment along the project corridor, making it noticeably more urban. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100249, 585 oversize pages and maps, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526954?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 7] T2 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 816526893; 14441-100249_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to Interstate 5 (I-5) from La Jolla Village Drive in the City of San Diego to Harbor Boulevard in the City of Oceanside, California are proposed. Located in San Diego Countys north coastal area, the I-5 North Coast Corridors 27 miles of highway connects the cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar and San Diego. As a gateway to San Diego County, the I-5 North Coast Corridor is one of the most traveled highways in the nation. It carries locals and visitors to attractions such as its six lagoons, world-renowned beaches, Legoland and Del Mar Fairgrounds, employment centers, and communities. For most of the project area, there have been minimal improvements to the existing interstate facility since the original construction during the 1960's and 1970's and the corridor currently experiences periodic traffic congestion during weekday peak hours. The proposed improvements would include one or two high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) managed lanes in each direction, auxiliary lanes where needed, and possibly one general purpose lane in each direction. The HOV/managed lanes would be available for carpools, vanpools, busses at no cost and be available to single-occupant vehicles for a fee when there is sufficient capacity. Four build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are assessed in this draft EIS. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a concrete barrier using standard 10-foot shoulder widths. There would be would a buffer separating HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a four-foot and variable buffer width in lieu of the barrier from Voigt Drive to Del Mar Heights Road and from SR-78 to Harbor Drive /Vandegrift Boulevard. A total of four HOV/managed lanes would be built from north of the freeway-to-freeway connector in San Diego to Harbor Drive/Vandegrift in Oceanside. There would be two HOV/managed lanes from Voigt Drive in San Diego to the freeway-to-freeway connector. New freeway access at Voigt Drive, Manchester Avenue, Cannon Road and Oceanside Boulevard would be constructed. In addition, one general-purpose lane would be constructed in each direction on I-5 from south of Del Mar Heights Road in San Diego to SR-78 in Oceanside. There would be auxiliary lanes constructed at various locations within the project area and operational improvements. The 10+4 with Buffer Alternative would function similarly, but would use a buffer to separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a width of four feet in some locations instead of the barrier. The 8+4 with Barrier and the 8+4 with Buffer alternatives would be similar, but would not include the additional general-purpose lanes. Cost estimates for the build alternatives range from $3.3 billion to $4.3 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service, provide a facility that is compatible with future bus rapid transit and other modal options, provide consistency with the regional transportation plan, and maintain I-5 as an effective link in the national strategic highway network. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would impact 24 to 27 acres of farmland and 23 to 29 acres of federal wetlands, impact two archaeological sites, and require relocations of 50 to 112 residences and 10 to 13 businesses. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would displace a 47-unit apartment complex in northern Carlsbad within an area identified as having a high concentration of Spanish-speaking households as well as a high proportion of minority populations. All four build alternatives would result in highly adverse changes to the existing visual environment along the project corridor, making it noticeably more urban. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100249, 585 oversize pages and maps, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526893?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 7] T2 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 816526887; 14441-100249_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to Interstate 5 (I-5) from La Jolla Village Drive in the City of San Diego to Harbor Boulevard in the City of Oceanside, California are proposed. Located in San Diego Countys north coastal area, the I-5 North Coast Corridors 27 miles of highway connects the cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar and San Diego. As a gateway to San Diego County, the I-5 North Coast Corridor is one of the most traveled highways in the nation. It carries locals and visitors to attractions such as its six lagoons, world-renowned beaches, Legoland and Del Mar Fairgrounds, employment centers, and communities. For most of the project area, there have been minimal improvements to the existing interstate facility since the original construction during the 1960's and 1970's and the corridor currently experiences periodic traffic congestion during weekday peak hours. The proposed improvements would include one or two high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) managed lanes in each direction, auxiliary lanes where needed, and possibly one general purpose lane in each direction. The HOV/managed lanes would be available for carpools, vanpools, busses at no cost and be available to single-occupant vehicles for a fee when there is sufficient capacity. Four build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are assessed in this draft EIS. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a concrete barrier using standard 10-foot shoulder widths. There would be would a buffer separating HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a four-foot and variable buffer width in lieu of the barrier from Voigt Drive to Del Mar Heights Road and from SR-78 to Harbor Drive /Vandegrift Boulevard. A total of four HOV/managed lanes would be built from north of the freeway-to-freeway connector in San Diego to Harbor Drive/Vandegrift in Oceanside. There would be two HOV/managed lanes from Voigt Drive in San Diego to the freeway-to-freeway connector. New freeway access at Voigt Drive, Manchester Avenue, Cannon Road and Oceanside Boulevard would be constructed. In addition, one general-purpose lane would be constructed in each direction on I-5 from south of Del Mar Heights Road in San Diego to SR-78 in Oceanside. There would be auxiliary lanes constructed at various locations within the project area and operational improvements. The 10+4 with Buffer Alternative would function similarly, but would use a buffer to separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a width of four feet in some locations instead of the barrier. The 8+4 with Barrier and the 8+4 with Buffer alternatives would be similar, but would not include the additional general-purpose lanes. Cost estimates for the build alternatives range from $3.3 billion to $4.3 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service, provide a facility that is compatible with future bus rapid transit and other modal options, provide consistency with the regional transportation plan, and maintain I-5 as an effective link in the national strategic highway network. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would impact 24 to 27 acres of farmland and 23 to 29 acres of federal wetlands, impact two archaeological sites, and require relocations of 50 to 112 residences and 10 to 13 businesses. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would displace a 47-unit apartment complex in northern Carlsbad within an area identified as having a high concentration of Spanish-speaking households as well as a high proportion of minority populations. All four build alternatives would result in highly adverse changes to the existing visual environment along the project corridor, making it noticeably more urban. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100249, 585 oversize pages and maps, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526887?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5 NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 754909715; 14441 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to Interstate 5 (I-5) from La Jolla Village Drive in the City of San Diego to Harbor Boulevard in the City of Oceanside, California are proposed. Located in San Diego Countys north coastal area, the I-5 North Coast Corridors 27 miles of highway connects the cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar and San Diego. As a gateway to San Diego County, the I-5 North Coast Corridor is one of the most traveled highways in the nation. It carries locals and visitors to attractions such as its six lagoons, world-renowned beaches, Legoland and Del Mar Fairgrounds, employment centers, and communities. For most of the project area, there have been minimal improvements to the existing interstate facility since the original construction during the 1960's and 1970's and the corridor currently experiences periodic traffic congestion during weekday peak hours. The proposed improvements would include one or two high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) managed lanes in each direction, auxiliary lanes where needed, and possibly one general purpose lane in each direction. The HOV/managed lanes would be available for carpools, vanpools, busses at no cost and be available to single-occupant vehicles for a fee when there is sufficient capacity. Four build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are assessed in this draft EIS. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a concrete barrier using standard 10-foot shoulder widths. There would be would a buffer separating HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a four-foot and variable buffer width in lieu of the barrier from Voigt Drive to Del Mar Heights Road and from SR-78 to Harbor Drive /Vandegrift Boulevard. A total of four HOV/managed lanes would be built from north of the freeway-to-freeway connector in San Diego to Harbor Drive/Vandegrift in Oceanside. There would be two HOV/managed lanes from Voigt Drive in San Diego to the freeway-to-freeway connector. New freeway access at Voigt Drive, Manchester Avenue, Cannon Road and Oceanside Boulevard would be constructed. In addition, one general-purpose lane would be constructed in each direction on I-5 from south of Del Mar Heights Road in San Diego to SR-78 in Oceanside. There would be auxiliary lanes constructed at various locations within the project area and operational improvements. The 10+4 with Buffer Alternative would function similarly, but would use a buffer to separate HOV/managed lanes from general-purpose lanes with a width of four feet in some locations instead of the barrier. The 8+4 with Barrier and the 8+4 with Buffer alternatives would be similar, but would not include the additional general-purpose lanes. Cost estimates for the build alternatives range from $3.3 billion to $4.3 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service, provide a facility that is compatible with future bus rapid transit and other modal options, provide consistency with the regional transportation plan, and maintain I-5 as an effective link in the national strategic highway network. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would impact 24 to 27 acres of farmland and 23 to 29 acres of federal wetlands, impact two archaeological sites, and require relocations of 50 to 112 residences and 10 to 13 businesses. The 10+4 with Barrier Alternative would displace a 47-unit apartment complex in northern Carlsbad within an area identified as having a high concentration of Spanish-speaking households as well as a high proportion of minority populations. All four build alternatives would result in highly adverse changes to the existing visual environment along the project corridor, making it noticeably more urban. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100249, 585 oversize pages and maps, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754909715?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5+NORTH+COAST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sacramento, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 69, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY 11, FROM BENOIT TO ROBINSONVILLE, BOLIVAR, COAHOMA, TUNICA, AND SUNFLOWER COUNTIES, MISSISSIPPI (NCPD-1069-00(001)). AN - 754908486; 14443 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a multi-lane interstate highway extending 120 miles, designated Section of Independent Utility (SIU) 11 of Interstate 69 (I-69), from Benoit to Robinsonville in Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and Sunflower counties, Mississippi is proposed. The study corridor extends in a southwest-northeast direction from State Route (SR) 1 near Benoit to SR 304 near Robinsonville. The I-69 corridor has been defined by the U.S. Congress to commence in Port Huron, Michigan and terminate in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, a distance of over 1,600 miles. Since the study of SIU 11 began, other portions of I-69 to the north and south of the project have been undergoing work ranging from planning to construction. In addition to a No-Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and alternatives involving other modes of transport, this final EIS addresses three build alternatives. The modified Central Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would use as much of the existing US 61 as possible. Construction of the proposed I-69 SIU 11 is envisioned to be phased over the next 19 years and the project was determined to consist of five distinct and operationally independent phases. Estimated construction cost of the project is $1.25 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The interstate highway would enhance regional and local transportation, facilitate economic development in the lower Mississippi River delta region, facilitate connections to intermodal facilities and major ports along the corridor, reduce accident risk, upgrade existing facilities to be utilized as portions of I-69, and connect urban areas along the I-69 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements would result in the displacement of 8,193 acres of farmlands, 54 residences, five businesses, 106 acres of wetlands, 1,682 acres of floodplain, and 175 acres of vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat. The purchase of 17 conservation easements would be necessary. Up to 12,945 linear feet of channel along 32 streams would require relocation, as would nine transmission lines extending a total of 3,210 feet and 25 gas pipelines extending a total of 95,225 feet. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity five sensitive receptor sites. The project could possibly affect nine archaeological sites. Construction workers would encounter three hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107). and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0390D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100251, Final EIS--355 pages, maps and appendices, Plan/Profile Sheets Supplement, July 2, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MS-FEIS-04-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Easements KW - Economic Assessments KW - Electric Power KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Minorities KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Streams KW - Transmission Lines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mississippi KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908486?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+69%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+11%2C+FROM+BENOIT+TO+ROBINSONVILLE%2C+BOLIVAR%2C+COAHOMA%2C+TUNICA%2C+AND+SUNFLOWER+COUNTIES%2C+MISSISSIPPI+%28NCPD-1069-00%28001%29%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jackson, Mississippi; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - The SW 98th Street Pedestrian Walkway - Lessons Learned from King County's First ARRA Project T2 - 2010 Western District Annual Meeting AN - 839661078; 5900814 JF - 2010 Western District Annual Meeting AU - Chang, Kevin Y1 - 2010/06/27/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Jun 27 KW - {Q1} KW - Pedestrians KW - U 7000:Multidisciplinary UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/839661078?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2010+Western+District+Annual+Meeting&rft.atitle=The+SW+98th+Street+Pedestrian+Walkway+-+Lessons+Learned+from+King+County%27s+First+ARRA+Project&rft.au=Chang%2C+Kevin&rft.aulast=Chang&rft.aufirst=Kevin&rft.date=2010-06-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2010+Western+District+Annual+Meeting&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.westernite.org/annualmeetings/sanfran10/ITE2010_Technical_P LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-11 N1 - Last updated - 2011-01-14 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - I-80 Winter Operations Coalition T2 - 2010 Western District Annual Meeting AN - 839660506; 5900809 JF - 2010 Western District Annual Meeting AU - Hoffman, Bill Y1 - 2010/06/27/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Jun 27 KW - {Q1} KW - Winter KW - U 7000:Multidisciplinary UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/839660506?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2010+Western+District+Annual+Meeting&rft.atitle=I-80+Winter+Operations+Coalition&rft.au=Hoffman%2C+Bill&rft.aulast=Hoffman&rft.aufirst=Bill&rft.date=2010-06-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2010+Western+District+Annual+Meeting&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.westernite.org/annualmeetings/sanfran10/ITE2010_Technical_P LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-11 N1 - Last updated - 2011-01-14 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - NDOT Statewide Integrated Transportation Reliability Program (ITRP); T2 - 2010 Western District Annual Meeting AN - 839655657; 5900841 JF - 2010 Western District Annual Meeting AU - Hoffman, Bill Y1 - 2010/06/27/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Jun 27 KW - {Q1} KW - Transportation KW - U 7000:Multidisciplinary UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/839655657?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2010+Western+District+Annual+Meeting&rft.atitle=NDOT+Statewide+Integrated+Transportation+Reliability+Program+%28ITRP%29%3B&rft.au=Hoffman%2C+Bill&rft.aulast=Hoffman&rft.aufirst=Bill&rft.date=2010-06-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2010+Western+District+Annual+Meeting&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.westernite.org/annualmeetings/sanfran10/ITE2010_Technical_P LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-11 N1 - Last updated - 2011-01-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 10 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876255175; 14435-3_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255175?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 9 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876255173; 14435-3_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255173?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 8 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876255170; 14435-3_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255170?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 7 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876255167; 14435-3_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255167?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 6 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876255165; 14435-3_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255165?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 18 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254357; 14435-3_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254357?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 17 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254354; 14435-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254354?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 16 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254352; 14435-3_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254352?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 23 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254210; 14435-3_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254210?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 22 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254208; 14435-3_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254208?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 21 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254206; 14435-3_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254206?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 20 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254203; 14435-3_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254203?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 19 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254199; 14435-3_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254199?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 3 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254195; 14435-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254195?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 2 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254191; 14435-3_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254191?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 1 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254184; 14435-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254184?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 24 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254174; 14435-3_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254174?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 15 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254171; 14435-3_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254171?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 14 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254167; 14435-3_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254167?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 13 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254166; 14435-3_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254166?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 12 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254164; 14435-3_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254164?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 11 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254160; 14435-3_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254160?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 5 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254159; 14435-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254159?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. [Part 4 of 24] T2 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 876254157; 14435-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254157?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-85 EXTENSION FROM I-59/I-20 NEAR THE MISSISSIPPI STATE LINE TO I-65 NEAR MONTGOMERY, PORTIONS OF AUTAUGA, DALLAS, HALE, LOWNDES, MARENGO, MONTGOMERY, PERRY, AND SUMTER COUNTIES, ALABAMA. AN - 754909710; 14435 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new extension of Interstate 85 (I-85) from I-59/I-20 northeast of Cuba, Alabama and near the Mississippi state line to I-65 near Montgomery, Alabama is proposed. Six of the counties in the study area, Dallas, Hale, Lowndes, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter, are located in the Black Belt, a group of primarily agricultural counties with dark, rich soil, extending east to west across central Alabama, that currently experience high rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality. Portions of Autauga and Montgomery counties are also included in the study area. Rural Alabama lacks interstate level roadways and the proposed I-85 extension is one of several initiatives to improve transportation infrastructure within the Black Belt region which could provide opportunities for economic growth. The proposed project would be constructed as a multi-lane, access-controlled freeway on new location, with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The roadway would consist of four 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders, six-foot paved inside shoulders, and a 90-foot depressed, grassed median. A wide range of alternatives, including mass transit and transportation system management were evaluated in relation to the project. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative and 36 build alternatives which vary from 113 to 129 miles in length. Depending on the alternative, 21 to 29 interchanges would be constructed and a nominal 400-foot right-of-way would be used. Two commercially navigable waterways, the Tombigbee River and the Alabama River, would be crossed. The estimated cost of implementing the preferred alternative is $2.4 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would provide jobs and increase business activity in various sectors of the regional economy during the construction period and afterwards. Traffic congestion in Selma, Demopolis, and Uniontown would be reduced by the diversion of through traffic and trucks. Safety would be improved by reducing the number of trucks on local, two-lane roads and through grade separation at railroad crossings. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway footprint under the preferred alternative would occupy 7,000 acres, including 755 acres of wetlands and 1,254 acres of floodplain; require relocation of 52 residences, 38 of which are minority-owned, and one commercial property; and impact seven potential archaeological sites. Noise increases of 15 decibels or greater would impact eight receptors. Twelve of the build alternatives, but not the preferred alternative, would have adverse visual effects associated with the I-85 interchange with the Selma to Montgomery National Historical Trail in Montgomery County. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-59), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100243, Volume I--386 pages and maps, Volume II--450 pages, Volume III--485 pages, June 25, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Economic Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754909710?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.title=I-85+EXTENSION+FROM+I-59%2FI-20+NEAR+THE+MISSISSIPPI+STATE+LINE+TO+I-65+NEAR+MONTGOMERY%2C+PORTIONS+OF+AUTAUGA%2C+DALLAS%2C+HALE%2C+LOWNDES%2C+MARENGO%2C+MONTGOMERY%2C+PERRY%2C+AND+SUMTER+COUNTIES%2C+ALABAMA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-20 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 24 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131260; 14391-0_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131260?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131246; 14391-0_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131246?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131237; 14391-0_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131237?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131223; 14391-0_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131223?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 32 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131147; 14391-0_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131147?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 31 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131139; 14391-0_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131139?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 40 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131134; 14391-0_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131134?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 39 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131129; 14391-0_0039 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 39 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131129?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 30 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131128; 14391-0_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131128?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 38 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131117; 14391-0_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131117?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 29 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131114; 14391-0_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131114?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 28 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131109; 14391-0_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131109?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131094; 14391-0_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131094?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 21 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131091; 14391-0_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131091?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 13 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131083; 14391-0_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131083?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131080; 14391-0_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131080?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 12 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131068; 14391-0_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131068?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131050; 14391-0_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131050?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131031; 14391-0_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131031?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131030; 14391-0_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131030?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 35 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129102; 14391-0_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129102?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 16 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129077; 14391-0_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129077?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129044; 14391-0_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129044?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 41 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129041; 14391-0_0041 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 41 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129041?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 34 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873129016; 14391-0_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129016?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 33 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128992; 14391-0_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128992?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128973; 14391-0_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128973?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128961; 14391-0_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128961?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 27 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128910; 14391-0_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128910?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128900; 14391-0_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128900?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 25 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128887; 14391-0_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128887?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128877; 14391-0_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128877?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128861; 14391-0_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128861?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128844; 14391-0_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128844?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128820; 14391-0_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128820?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873128801; 14391-0_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128801?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 36 of 41] T2 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873127828; 14391-0_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127828?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED COMMON FEATURES PROJECT, NATOMAS POST-AUTHORIZATION CHANGE REPORT, NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4B LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SACRAMENTO AND SUTTER COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 754907381; 14391 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4b Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The Natomas Basin is located at the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers and encompasses 53,000 acres. In addition to the American and Sacramento Rivers to the south and west, the Natomas Basin is bordered to the north by the Natomas Cross Canal (NCC) and to the east by the Pleasant Grove Creek Canal (PGCC) and the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal (NEMDC). The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Phase 4b Project is the final subphase of the Landside Improvements Project. The NLIP implements features from several prior authorizations of the American Rivers Common Features Project, which was the subject of an interim general reevaluation study that specifically identified changes to the Natomas portion of the authorized project. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under the Adjacent Levee Alternative, which is the proposed action, an adjacent levee would be constructed along the Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620, and cutoff walls, seepage berms, and relief wells would be installed for seepage remediation. A cutoff wall would be installed in the American River north levee east of Gateway Oaks Drive to Northgate Boulevard, and the landside slope would be flattened. The NEMDC west levee would be raised in place or widened from just south of Elkhorn Boulevard to Sankey Road, and the landside slope would be flattened and seepage remediation would be constructed as necessary. Waterside erosion protection would be constructed in locations along the PGCC and NEMDC. Culverts located beneath the PGCC would be upgraded or removed, and replacement flood storage would be provided. At the SR 99 crossing of the NCC, seepage remediation would be installed and a moveable barrier system would be constructed to prevent overflow from reaching the landside of the NCC south levee. The western portion of the West Drainage Canal would be realigned to the south, and the remaining portion of the existing canal would be improved to reduce bank erosion and sloughing, decrease aquatic weed infiltration, improve maintenance access, and enhance giant garter snake habitat connectivity. Irrigation canals and ditches would be relocated either to make room for expanded levee sections or to reduce underseepage potential. Discharge pipes would be raised to cross the levee above design flood water surface elevation. Parcels in the South Fishermans Lake and Triangle Properties Borrow Areas and at the West Lakeside School Site would be excavated and reclaimed as agricultural land. Under the Fix-in-Place Alternative, the Sacramento River east levee would be improved in place in Sacramento River east levee Reach A:1620 and seepage remediation would be implemented. The Fix-in-Place Alternative would be the same as described for the Adjacent Levee Alternative except that the crown of the Sacramento River east levee would not be widened. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $8.2 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert large acreages of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would require 25 property acquisitions. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100240, Main Post-Authorization Change Report--197 pages and maps/CD-ROM, Draft EIS--772 pages and maps/CD-ROM, June 24, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - American River KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754907381?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-24&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=AMERICAN+RIVER+WATERSHED+COMMON+FEATURES+PROJECT%2C+NATOMAS+POST-AUTHORIZATION+CHANGE+REPORT%2C+NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4B+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SACRAMENTO+AND+SUTTER+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 24, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Preliminary Information on Ambient Concentrations Measured at the Las Vegas National Near-Roadway MSAT Study Site T2 - 103rd Annual Conference & Exhibition of The Air & Waste Management Association (A&WMA 2010) AN - 839658007; 5898379 JF - 103rd Annual Conference & Exhibition of The Air & Waste Management Association (A&WMA 2010) AU - Claggett, M AU - Martinez, V AU - Kimbrough, S AU - Black, K Y1 - 2010/06/22/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Jun 22 KW - {Q1} KW - USA, Nevada, Las Vegas KW - U 4300:Environmental Science UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/839658007?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=103rd+Annual+Conference+%26+Exhibition+of+The+Air+%26+Waste+Management+Association+%28A%26WMA+2010%29&rft.atitle=Preliminary+Information+on+Ambient+Concentrations+Measured+at+the+Las+Vegas+National+Near-Roadway+MSAT+Study+Site&rft.au=Claggett%2C+M%3BMartinez%2C+V%3BKimbrough%2C+S%3BBlack%2C+K&rft.aulast=Claggett&rft.aufirst=M&rft.date=2010-06-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=103rd+Annual+Conference+%26+Exhibition+of+The+Air+%26+Waste+Management+Association+%28A%26WMA+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.awma.org/ACE2010/files/9563section3.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-11 N1 - Last updated - 2011-01-14 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - MOVES2010 Project-Scale Modal Emission Factors T2 - 103rd Annual Conference & Exhibition of The Air & Waste Management Association (A&WMA 2010) AN - 839646347; 5898084 JF - 103rd Annual Conference & Exhibition of The Air & Waste Management Association (A&WMA 2010) AU - Claggett, M Y1 - 2010/06/22/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Jun 22 KW - {Q1} KW - Emissions KW - U 4300:Environmental Science UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/839646347?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=103rd+Annual+Conference+%26+Exhibition+of+The+Air+%26+Waste+Management+Association+%28A%26WMA+2010%29&rft.atitle=MOVES2010+Project-Scale+Modal+Emission+Factors&rft.au=Claggett%2C+M&rft.aulast=Claggett&rft.aufirst=M&rft.date=2010-06-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=103rd+Annual+Conference+%26+Exhibition+of+The+Air+%26+Waste+Management+Association+%28A%26WMA+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.awma.org/ACE2010/files/9563section3.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-11 N1 - Last updated - 2011-01-14 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - The New 'Grand Challenge': Deploying Vehicle Communications T2 - 2010 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV 2010) AN - 839662258; 5915666 JF - 2010 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV 2010) AU - Resendes, Raymond Y1 - 2010/06/21/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Jun 21 KW - {Q1} KW - Communication KW - U 7000:Multidisciplinary UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/839662258?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2010+IEEE+Intelligent+Vehicles+Symposium+%28IV+2010%29&rft.atitle=The+New+%27Grand+Challenge%27%3A+Deploying+Vehicle+Communications&rft.au=Resendes%2C+Raymond&rft.aulast=Resendes&rft.aufirst=Raymond&rft.date=2010-06-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2010+IEEE+Intelligent+Vehicles+Symposium+%28IV+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://cvrr.ucsd.edu/IV2010/pdfs/IVS2010ProgramBookwCovers.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-11 N1 - Last updated - 2011-01-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 8 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876255567; 14381-0_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255567?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 12 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876255066; 14381-0_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255066?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 11 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876255062; 14381-0_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255062?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 10 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876255058; 14381-0_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255058?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 9 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876255055; 14381-0_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255055?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 3 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876255052; 14381-0_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255052?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 2 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876255040; 14381-0_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255040?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 1 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876252531; 14381-0_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252531?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 7 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876251951; 14381-0_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251951?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 6 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876251795; 14381-0_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251795?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 5 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876251794; 14381-0_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251794?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. [Part 4 of 12] T2 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 876251793; 14381-0_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251793?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AIRSPACE TRAINING INITIATIVE, SHAW AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH CAROLINA. [Part 3 of 3] T2 - AIRSPACE TRAINING INITIATIVE, SHAW AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH CAROLINA. AN - 816526924; 14385-100234_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The modification of Air Force training airspace over portions of South Carolina and Georgia is proposed to improve training for pilots based at Shaw Air Force Base (AFB) and McEntire Air National Guard Station in South Carolina. The 20th Fighter Wing and 169th Fighter Wing need access to local training airspace that provides a realistic combat environment to support national military objectives. The Airspace Training Initiative as presented in the draft EIS of August 2005 proposed to create a new Military Operations Area (MOA)/Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace to join the western boundary of another MOA (Gamecock D) with a restricted area over Poinsett Electronic Combat Range. As a result of the draft EIS review and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aeronautical review process, the Air Force and FAA consulted to mitigate air traffic concerns. The Gamecock MOA revisions or additions proposed in the draft EIS are no longer a part of the mitigated proposed action, which is the preferred alternative presented in this final EIS. Training needs would be met through use of defined airspace that permit F-16 aircraft to transit from Gamecock D to Poinsett Range between 18,000 to 22,000 feet mean sea level. Other elements of the mitigated proposed action and alternatives include change in the shape of the existing airspace in Georgia and South Carolina, construction of new transmitter locations in Georgia, and deployment of chaff and flares in the new airspace in Georgia. The mitigated proposed action would create Bulldog C and E MOAs. Civilian airports within the proposed MOAs would have minimum exclusion areas of 3 nautical miles and 1,500 feet above ground level. In addition, the proposed Bulldog E MOA would have a larger exclusionary area designated around the Emanuel County Airport in response to concerns about interference with airport operations. The FAA Atlanta Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) would have the authority to manage the airspace and control civilian air traffic into and out of the Swainsboro and Millen airports. The Atlanta ARTCC would also have the authority to temporarily raise the floors of the proposed MOAs when they are active to allow civilian aircraft clearance to transit the airspace. Most conflicts with military training routes, federal airways, jet routes, and private airports would be avoided because the altitude at which these routes are established are either above or below the airspace in the mitigated proposed action or alternatives. In cases where these routes intersect with the proposed airspace and alternative airspace, deconfliction (airspace scheduling and avoidance areas) would be managed as it is for current conditions. Deployment of chaff designed to not interfere with FAA radars would be managed through communication between the 20th Fighter Wing and the ARTCC. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS considers two other action alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternatives A and B would be comparable to the proposed action, except that they would vary the airspace modifications and training transmitter sites. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The modification of the airspace would improve training for pilots based at the Shaw and McEntire facilities and would provide pilots with the opportunity to developed conditioned responses to threats and provide adequate space for combat training maneuvers. The airspace would support the full range of maneuvers and tactics and would improve aircrew combat success. Both military and commercial airspace and air traffic control would be enhanced. Aircraft noise would decline in some areas. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Increased noise levels in some areas would increase the proportion of persons affected negatively by noise from one percent to four percent. Aircraft noise could affect wildlife, including seven endangered and six threatened species. Aircraft operations would pose a risk of collision with birds and damage to wildlife and their habitat. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0460D, Volume 29, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100234, 803 pages, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cultural Resources KW - Indian Reservations KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Safety KW - Georgia KW - McEntire Air National Guard Station KW - Shaw Air Force Base KW - South Carolina UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526924?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AIRSPACE+TRAINING+INITIATIVE%2C+SHAW+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=AIRSPACE+TRAINING+INITIATIVE%2C+SHAW+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Combat Command, Langley AFB, Virginia; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AIRSPACE TRAINING INITIATIVE, SHAW AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH CAROLINA. [Part 2 of 3] T2 - AIRSPACE TRAINING INITIATIVE, SHAW AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH CAROLINA. AN - 816526889; 14385-100234_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The modification of Air Force training airspace over portions of South Carolina and Georgia is proposed to improve training for pilots based at Shaw Air Force Base (AFB) and McEntire Air National Guard Station in South Carolina. The 20th Fighter Wing and 169th Fighter Wing need access to local training airspace that provides a realistic combat environment to support national military objectives. The Airspace Training Initiative as presented in the draft EIS of August 2005 proposed to create a new Military Operations Area (MOA)/Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace to join the western boundary of another MOA (Gamecock D) with a restricted area over Poinsett Electronic Combat Range. As a result of the draft EIS review and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aeronautical review process, the Air Force and FAA consulted to mitigate air traffic concerns. The Gamecock MOA revisions or additions proposed in the draft EIS are no longer a part of the mitigated proposed action, which is the preferred alternative presented in this final EIS. Training needs would be met through use of defined airspace that permit F-16 aircraft to transit from Gamecock D to Poinsett Range between 18,000 to 22,000 feet mean sea level. Other elements of the mitigated proposed action and alternatives include change in the shape of the existing airspace in Georgia and South Carolina, construction of new transmitter locations in Georgia, and deployment of chaff and flares in the new airspace in Georgia. The mitigated proposed action would create Bulldog C and E MOAs. Civilian airports within the proposed MOAs would have minimum exclusion areas of 3 nautical miles and 1,500 feet above ground level. In addition, the proposed Bulldog E MOA would have a larger exclusionary area designated around the Emanuel County Airport in response to concerns about interference with airport operations. The FAA Atlanta Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) would have the authority to manage the airspace and control civilian air traffic into and out of the Swainsboro and Millen airports. The Atlanta ARTCC would also have the authority to temporarily raise the floors of the proposed MOAs when they are active to allow civilian aircraft clearance to transit the airspace. Most conflicts with military training routes, federal airways, jet routes, and private airports would be avoided because the altitude at which these routes are established are either above or below the airspace in the mitigated proposed action or alternatives. In cases where these routes intersect with the proposed airspace and alternative airspace, deconfliction (airspace scheduling and avoidance areas) would be managed as it is for current conditions. Deployment of chaff designed to not interfere with FAA radars would be managed through communication between the 20th Fighter Wing and the ARTCC. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS considers two other action alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternatives A and B would be comparable to the proposed action, except that they would vary the airspace modifications and training transmitter sites. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The modification of the airspace would improve training for pilots based at the Shaw and McEntire facilities and would provide pilots with the opportunity to developed conditioned responses to threats and provide adequate space for combat training maneuvers. The airspace would support the full range of maneuvers and tactics and would improve aircrew combat success. Both military and commercial airspace and air traffic control would be enhanced. Aircraft noise would decline in some areas. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Increased noise levels in some areas would increase the proportion of persons affected negatively by noise from one percent to four percent. Aircraft noise could affect wildlife, including seven endangered and six threatened species. Aircraft operations would pose a risk of collision with birds and damage to wildlife and their habitat. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0460D, Volume 29, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100234, 803 pages, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cultural Resources KW - Indian Reservations KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Safety KW - Georgia KW - McEntire Air National Guard Station KW - Shaw Air Force Base KW - South Carolina UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526889?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AIRSPACE+TRAINING+INITIATIVE%2C+SHAW+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=AIRSPACE+TRAINING+INITIATIVE%2C+SHAW+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Combat Command, Langley AFB, Virginia; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AIRSPACE TRAINING INITIATIVE, SHAW AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH CAROLINA. [Part 1 of 3] T2 - AIRSPACE TRAINING INITIATIVE, SHAW AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH CAROLINA. AN - 816526828; 14385-100234_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The modification of Air Force training airspace over portions of South Carolina and Georgia is proposed to improve training for pilots based at Shaw Air Force Base (AFB) and McEntire Air National Guard Station in South Carolina. The 20th Fighter Wing and 169th Fighter Wing need access to local training airspace that provides a realistic combat environment to support national military objectives. The Airspace Training Initiative as presented in the draft EIS of August 2005 proposed to create a new Military Operations Area (MOA)/Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace to join the western boundary of another MOA (Gamecock D) with a restricted area over Poinsett Electronic Combat Range. As a result of the draft EIS review and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aeronautical review process, the Air Force and FAA consulted to mitigate air traffic concerns. The Gamecock MOA revisions or additions proposed in the draft EIS are no longer a part of the mitigated proposed action, which is the preferred alternative presented in this final EIS. Training needs would be met through use of defined airspace that permit F-16 aircraft to transit from Gamecock D to Poinsett Range between 18,000 to 22,000 feet mean sea level. Other elements of the mitigated proposed action and alternatives include change in the shape of the existing airspace in Georgia and South Carolina, construction of new transmitter locations in Georgia, and deployment of chaff and flares in the new airspace in Georgia. The mitigated proposed action would create Bulldog C and E MOAs. Civilian airports within the proposed MOAs would have minimum exclusion areas of 3 nautical miles and 1,500 feet above ground level. In addition, the proposed Bulldog E MOA would have a larger exclusionary area designated around the Emanuel County Airport in response to concerns about interference with airport operations. The FAA Atlanta Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) would have the authority to manage the airspace and control civilian air traffic into and out of the Swainsboro and Millen airports. The Atlanta ARTCC would also have the authority to temporarily raise the floors of the proposed MOAs when they are active to allow civilian aircraft clearance to transit the airspace. Most conflicts with military training routes, federal airways, jet routes, and private airports would be avoided because the altitude at which these routes are established are either above or below the airspace in the mitigated proposed action or alternatives. In cases where these routes intersect with the proposed airspace and alternative airspace, deconfliction (airspace scheduling and avoidance areas) would be managed as it is for current conditions. Deployment of chaff designed to not interfere with FAA radars would be managed through communication between the 20th Fighter Wing and the ARTCC. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS considers two other action alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternatives A and B would be comparable to the proposed action, except that they would vary the airspace modifications and training transmitter sites. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The modification of the airspace would improve training for pilots based at the Shaw and McEntire facilities and would provide pilots with the opportunity to developed conditioned responses to threats and provide adequate space for combat training maneuvers. The airspace would support the full range of maneuvers and tactics and would improve aircrew combat success. Both military and commercial airspace and air traffic control would be enhanced. Aircraft noise would decline in some areas. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Increased noise levels in some areas would increase the proportion of persons affected negatively by noise from one percent to four percent. Aircraft noise could affect wildlife, including seven endangered and six threatened species. Aircraft operations would pose a risk of collision with birds and damage to wildlife and their habitat. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0460D, Volume 29, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100234, 803 pages, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cultural Resources KW - Indian Reservations KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Safety KW - Georgia KW - McEntire Air National Guard Station KW - Shaw Air Force Base KW - South Carolina UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526828?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AIRSPACE+TRAINING+INITIATIVE%2C+SHAW+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=AIRSPACE+TRAINING+INITIATIVE%2C+SHAW+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Combat Command, Langley AFB, Virginia; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HONOLULU HIGH-CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, OAHU, HAWAII. AN - 754908325; 14381 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a high-capacity transit service project on the Island of Oahu, Hawaii is proposed. The study corridor extends from Kapolei in the west to the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH Manoa) in the east and is confined by the Waianae and Koolau Mountain Ranges to the north and the Pacific Ocean to the south. This corridor includes the majority of housing and employment on Oahu. Its east-west length is approximately 23 miles, and between Pearl City and Aiea its width is less than one mile. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The build alternatives include: the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via Salt Lake Boulevard (Salt Lake Alternative); the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport (Airport Alternative); and the Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative via the Airport and Salt Lake (Airport & Salt Lake Alternative). All action alternatives would provide a fixed guideway transit system from East Kapolei to Ala Moana Center (the project). Planned extensions are anticipated to West Kapolei, UH Manoa, and Waikiki. The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) selected by the City Council includes the project and the planned extensions. The Airport Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, is a 20-mile portion of the LPA that begins at the University of Hawaii at West Oahu near the future Kroc Center, and proceeds via Farrington Highway and Kamehameha Highway, to Aolele Street serving the airport, to Dillinghan Boulevard, to Nimitz Highway, to Halekauwila Street, and ending at Ala Moana Center. The system would use steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology and could be either automated or employ drivers. All parts of the guideway would be elevated except near Leeward Community College, where it would be at-grade in exclusive right-of-way. Supporting facilities would include a vehicle maintenance and storage facility, transit centers, park-and-ride lots, and traction power substations. Construction is planned to begin in 2010 and be completed by 2019. Capital cost is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars to be $5.1 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve mobility for travelers who face increasingly severe traffic congestion, improve transportation system reliability, provide accessibility to new development in the Ewa-Kapolei-Makakilo area and improve transportation equity for all travelers. The project would also provide additional transit capacity and an alternative to private automobile travel, as well as improve transit links within the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would require relocation of 20 residences, 1 church, and 66 businesses. Wheel skirts would reduce noise exposure levels, but three high-rise residential buildings would still experience moderate noise impacts. The project would adversely affect 33 historic resources. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100230, Final EIS--605 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Hawaii KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908325?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=HONOLULU+HIGH-CAPACITY+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+HONOLULU%2C+OAHU%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - AIRSPACE TRAINING INITIATIVE, SHAW AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH CAROLINA. AN - 754908030; 14385 AB - PURPOSE: The modification of Air Force training airspace over portions of South Carolina and Georgia is proposed to improve training for pilots based at Shaw Air Force Base (AFB) and McEntire Air National Guard Station in South Carolina. The 20th Fighter Wing and 169th Fighter Wing need access to local training airspace that provides a realistic combat environment to support national military objectives. The Airspace Training Initiative as presented in the draft EIS of August 2005 proposed to create a new Military Operations Area (MOA)/Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace to join the western boundary of another MOA (Gamecock D) with a restricted area over Poinsett Electronic Combat Range. As a result of the draft EIS review and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aeronautical review process, the Air Force and FAA consulted to mitigate air traffic concerns. The Gamecock MOA revisions or additions proposed in the draft EIS are no longer a part of the mitigated proposed action, which is the preferred alternative presented in this final EIS. Training needs would be met through use of defined airspace that permit F-16 aircraft to transit from Gamecock D to Poinsett Range between 18,000 to 22,000 feet mean sea level. Other elements of the mitigated proposed action and alternatives include change in the shape of the existing airspace in Georgia and South Carolina, construction of new transmitter locations in Georgia, and deployment of chaff and flares in the new airspace in Georgia. The mitigated proposed action would create Bulldog C and E MOAs. Civilian airports within the proposed MOAs would have minimum exclusion areas of 3 nautical miles and 1,500 feet above ground level. In addition, the proposed Bulldog E MOA would have a larger exclusionary area designated around the Emanuel County Airport in response to concerns about interference with airport operations. The FAA Atlanta Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) would have the authority to manage the airspace and control civilian air traffic into and out of the Swainsboro and Millen airports. The Atlanta ARTCC would also have the authority to temporarily raise the floors of the proposed MOAs when they are active to allow civilian aircraft clearance to transit the airspace. Most conflicts with military training routes, federal airways, jet routes, and private airports would be avoided because the altitude at which these routes are established are either above or below the airspace in the mitigated proposed action or alternatives. In cases where these routes intersect with the proposed airspace and alternative airspace, deconfliction (airspace scheduling and avoidance areas) would be managed as it is for current conditions. Deployment of chaff designed to not interfere with FAA radars would be managed through communication between the 20th Fighter Wing and the ARTCC. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS considers two other action alternatives and a No Action Alternative. Alternatives A and B would be comparable to the proposed action, except that they would vary the airspace modifications and training transmitter sites. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The modification of the airspace would improve training for pilots based at the Shaw and McEntire facilities and would provide pilots with the opportunity to developed conditioned responses to threats and provide adequate space for combat training maneuvers. The airspace would support the full range of maneuvers and tactics and would improve aircrew combat success. Both military and commercial airspace and air traffic control would be enhanced. Aircraft noise would decline in some areas. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Increased noise levels in some areas would increase the proportion of persons affected negatively by noise from one percent to four percent. Aircraft noise could affect wildlife, including seven endangered and six threatened species. Aircraft operations would pose a risk of collision with birds and damage to wildlife and their habitat. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0460D, Volume 29, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100234, 803 pages, June 18, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cultural Resources KW - Indian Reservations KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Noise Assessments KW - Safety KW - Georgia KW - McEntire Air National Guard Station KW - Shaw Air Force Base KW - South Carolina UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908030?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=AIRSPACE+TRAINING+INITIATIVE%2C+SHAW+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=AIRSPACE+TRAINING+INITIATIVE%2C+SHAW+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Combat Command, Langley AFB, Virginia; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 18, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. [Part 4 of 5] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. AN - 816527038; 14379-100228_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of State Road 23 (SR 23) between the cities of Fond du Lac and Plymouth in Fond du Lac and Sheboygan counties, Wisconsin is proposed. The study corridor begins at US 151 Fond du Lac Bypass, and extends approximately 19 miles eastward to County Road P in Sheboygan County. The existing SR 23 two-lane roadway has 1.3 miles of adequate concrete pavement and 17.3 miles of bituminous pavement that is exhibiting signs of distress. Six build alternatives following three alignments and a No Build Alternative were considered in a draft EIS of November 2004. The supplemental draft EIS of December 2009 addressed new build alternative components and corridor preservation alternatives. The preferred build alternative (Alternative 1) would involve construction of a full four-lane divided highway on the existing alignment for the full length of the project. From US 151 to County Road UU, a suburban cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and an 18-foot median with mountable curb. From County Road UU east to County Road P, an expressway cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and a 60-foot median. An extension of the Old Plank Trail would be constructed from the town of Greenbush to the Prairie Trail in Fond du Lac. A series of local roads and interchanges would be constructed to improve highway mobility and safety. The preferred alternative would implement corridor preservation at key intersections on SR 23 for future interchanges and overpasses. Two corridor preservation alternatives and the preferred No Corridor Preservation alternative for the US 151/SR 23 Interchange are also presented. Estimated total construction costs in year-of-expenditure dollars for the preferred build alternative, including the connection roads and interchanges and the Old Plank Trail are $139.7 million. Corridor preservation costs for SR 23 are estimated at $49.0 million. Corridor preservation cost estimates for US 151/SR 23 range from $50.3 million to $71.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would preserve the corridor for future transportation needs and provide safe and efficient transportation between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan to serve present and long-term traffic needs. The new facility would provide additional capacity within the corridor, enhancing community mobility and supporting economic development in east-central Wisconsin. The system link between the backbone routes US 41 and Interstate 43 would be completed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require of 212 acres of land and would result in the displacement of 14 residences, one businesses, 14 farms, and 32 acres of wetlands. The connection roads and interchanges component of the project would require 97 acres of right-of-way and would displace nine residences, and four businesses. The Old Plank Trail component of the project would require 102 acres of new right-of-way and would displace 12 acres of wetlands. The corridor preservation alternatives would require additional acreage at the time transportation improvements are implemented. The project would affect habitat for federal protected species and encroach on floodplains. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 05-0395D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0139D, Volume 34, Number 1, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100228, Final EIS--429 pages and maps, Appendices--460 pages and maps, June 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-04-03-F KW - Demography KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816527038?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. [Part 2 of 5] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. AN - 816527012; 14379-100228_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of State Road 23 (SR 23) between the cities of Fond du Lac and Plymouth in Fond du Lac and Sheboygan counties, Wisconsin is proposed. The study corridor begins at US 151 Fond du Lac Bypass, and extends approximately 19 miles eastward to County Road P in Sheboygan County. The existing SR 23 two-lane roadway has 1.3 miles of adequate concrete pavement and 17.3 miles of bituminous pavement that is exhibiting signs of distress. Six build alternatives following three alignments and a No Build Alternative were considered in a draft EIS of November 2004. The supplemental draft EIS of December 2009 addressed new build alternative components and corridor preservation alternatives. The preferred build alternative (Alternative 1) would involve construction of a full four-lane divided highway on the existing alignment for the full length of the project. From US 151 to County Road UU, a suburban cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and an 18-foot median with mountable curb. From County Road UU east to County Road P, an expressway cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and a 60-foot median. An extension of the Old Plank Trail would be constructed from the town of Greenbush to the Prairie Trail in Fond du Lac. A series of local roads and interchanges would be constructed to improve highway mobility and safety. The preferred alternative would implement corridor preservation at key intersections on SR 23 for future interchanges and overpasses. Two corridor preservation alternatives and the preferred No Corridor Preservation alternative for the US 151/SR 23 Interchange are also presented. Estimated total construction costs in year-of-expenditure dollars for the preferred build alternative, including the connection roads and interchanges and the Old Plank Trail are $139.7 million. Corridor preservation costs for SR 23 are estimated at $49.0 million. Corridor preservation cost estimates for US 151/SR 23 range from $50.3 million to $71.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would preserve the corridor for future transportation needs and provide safe and efficient transportation between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan to serve present and long-term traffic needs. The new facility would provide additional capacity within the corridor, enhancing community mobility and supporting economic development in east-central Wisconsin. The system link between the backbone routes US 41 and Interstate 43 would be completed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require of 212 acres of land and would result in the displacement of 14 residences, one businesses, 14 farms, and 32 acres of wetlands. The connection roads and interchanges component of the project would require 97 acres of right-of-way and would displace nine residences, and four businesses. The Old Plank Trail component of the project would require 102 acres of new right-of-way and would displace 12 acres of wetlands. The corridor preservation alternatives would require additional acreage at the time transportation improvements are implemented. The project would affect habitat for federal protected species and encroach on floodplains. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 05-0395D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0139D, Volume 34, Number 1, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100228, Final EIS--429 pages and maps, Appendices--460 pages and maps, June 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-04-03-F KW - Demography KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816527012?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. [Part 5 of 5] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. AN - 816526944; 14379-100228_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of State Road 23 (SR 23) between the cities of Fond du Lac and Plymouth in Fond du Lac and Sheboygan counties, Wisconsin is proposed. The study corridor begins at US 151 Fond du Lac Bypass, and extends approximately 19 miles eastward to County Road P in Sheboygan County. The existing SR 23 two-lane roadway has 1.3 miles of adequate concrete pavement and 17.3 miles of bituminous pavement that is exhibiting signs of distress. Six build alternatives following three alignments and a No Build Alternative were considered in a draft EIS of November 2004. The supplemental draft EIS of December 2009 addressed new build alternative components and corridor preservation alternatives. The preferred build alternative (Alternative 1) would involve construction of a full four-lane divided highway on the existing alignment for the full length of the project. From US 151 to County Road UU, a suburban cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and an 18-foot median with mountable curb. From County Road UU east to County Road P, an expressway cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and a 60-foot median. An extension of the Old Plank Trail would be constructed from the town of Greenbush to the Prairie Trail in Fond du Lac. A series of local roads and interchanges would be constructed to improve highway mobility and safety. The preferred alternative would implement corridor preservation at key intersections on SR 23 for future interchanges and overpasses. Two corridor preservation alternatives and the preferred No Corridor Preservation alternative for the US 151/SR 23 Interchange are also presented. Estimated total construction costs in year-of-expenditure dollars for the preferred build alternative, including the connection roads and interchanges and the Old Plank Trail are $139.7 million. Corridor preservation costs for SR 23 are estimated at $49.0 million. Corridor preservation cost estimates for US 151/SR 23 range from $50.3 million to $71.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would preserve the corridor for future transportation needs and provide safe and efficient transportation between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan to serve present and long-term traffic needs. The new facility would provide additional capacity within the corridor, enhancing community mobility and supporting economic development in east-central Wisconsin. The system link between the backbone routes US 41 and Interstate 43 would be completed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require of 212 acres of land and would result in the displacement of 14 residences, one businesses, 14 farms, and 32 acres of wetlands. The connection roads and interchanges component of the project would require 97 acres of right-of-way and would displace nine residences, and four businesses. The Old Plank Trail component of the project would require 102 acres of new right-of-way and would displace 12 acres of wetlands. The corridor preservation alternatives would require additional acreage at the time transportation improvements are implemented. The project would affect habitat for federal protected species and encroach on floodplains. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 05-0395D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0139D, Volume 34, Number 1, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100228, Final EIS--429 pages and maps, Appendices--460 pages and maps, June 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-04-03-F KW - Demography KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526944?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. [Part 1 of 5] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. AN - 816526932; 14379-100228_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of State Road 23 (SR 23) between the cities of Fond du Lac and Plymouth in Fond du Lac and Sheboygan counties, Wisconsin is proposed. The study corridor begins at US 151 Fond du Lac Bypass, and extends approximately 19 miles eastward to County Road P in Sheboygan County. The existing SR 23 two-lane roadway has 1.3 miles of adequate concrete pavement and 17.3 miles of bituminous pavement that is exhibiting signs of distress. Six build alternatives following three alignments and a No Build Alternative were considered in a draft EIS of November 2004. The supplemental draft EIS of December 2009 addressed new build alternative components and corridor preservation alternatives. The preferred build alternative (Alternative 1) would involve construction of a full four-lane divided highway on the existing alignment for the full length of the project. From US 151 to County Road UU, a suburban cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and an 18-foot median with mountable curb. From County Road UU east to County Road P, an expressway cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and a 60-foot median. An extension of the Old Plank Trail would be constructed from the town of Greenbush to the Prairie Trail in Fond du Lac. A series of local roads and interchanges would be constructed to improve highway mobility and safety. The preferred alternative would implement corridor preservation at key intersections on SR 23 for future interchanges and overpasses. Two corridor preservation alternatives and the preferred No Corridor Preservation alternative for the US 151/SR 23 Interchange are also presented. Estimated total construction costs in year-of-expenditure dollars for the preferred build alternative, including the connection roads and interchanges and the Old Plank Trail are $139.7 million. Corridor preservation costs for SR 23 are estimated at $49.0 million. Corridor preservation cost estimates for US 151/SR 23 range from $50.3 million to $71.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would preserve the corridor for future transportation needs and provide safe and efficient transportation between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan to serve present and long-term traffic needs. The new facility would provide additional capacity within the corridor, enhancing community mobility and supporting economic development in east-central Wisconsin. The system link between the backbone routes US 41 and Interstate 43 would be completed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require of 212 acres of land and would result in the displacement of 14 residences, one businesses, 14 farms, and 32 acres of wetlands. The connection roads and interchanges component of the project would require 97 acres of right-of-way and would displace nine residences, and four businesses. The Old Plank Trail component of the project would require 102 acres of new right-of-way and would displace 12 acres of wetlands. The corridor preservation alternatives would require additional acreage at the time transportation improvements are implemented. The project would affect habitat for federal protected species and encroach on floodplains. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 05-0395D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0139D, Volume 34, Number 1, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100228, Final EIS--429 pages and maps, Appendices--460 pages and maps, June 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-04-03-F KW - Demography KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526932?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. [Part 3 of 5] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. AN - 816526919; 14379-100228_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of State Road 23 (SR 23) between the cities of Fond du Lac and Plymouth in Fond du Lac and Sheboygan counties, Wisconsin is proposed. The study corridor begins at US 151 Fond du Lac Bypass, and extends approximately 19 miles eastward to County Road P in Sheboygan County. The existing SR 23 two-lane roadway has 1.3 miles of adequate concrete pavement and 17.3 miles of bituminous pavement that is exhibiting signs of distress. Six build alternatives following three alignments and a No Build Alternative were considered in a draft EIS of November 2004. The supplemental draft EIS of December 2009 addressed new build alternative components and corridor preservation alternatives. The preferred build alternative (Alternative 1) would involve construction of a full four-lane divided highway on the existing alignment for the full length of the project. From US 151 to County Road UU, a suburban cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and an 18-foot median with mountable curb. From County Road UU east to County Road P, an expressway cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and a 60-foot median. An extension of the Old Plank Trail would be constructed from the town of Greenbush to the Prairie Trail in Fond du Lac. A series of local roads and interchanges would be constructed to improve highway mobility and safety. The preferred alternative would implement corridor preservation at key intersections on SR 23 for future interchanges and overpasses. Two corridor preservation alternatives and the preferred No Corridor Preservation alternative for the US 151/SR 23 Interchange are also presented. Estimated total construction costs in year-of-expenditure dollars for the preferred build alternative, including the connection roads and interchanges and the Old Plank Trail are $139.7 million. Corridor preservation costs for SR 23 are estimated at $49.0 million. Corridor preservation cost estimates for US 151/SR 23 range from $50.3 million to $71.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would preserve the corridor for future transportation needs and provide safe and efficient transportation between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan to serve present and long-term traffic needs. The new facility would provide additional capacity within the corridor, enhancing community mobility and supporting economic development in east-central Wisconsin. The system link between the backbone routes US 41 and Interstate 43 would be completed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require of 212 acres of land and would result in the displacement of 14 residences, one businesses, 14 farms, and 32 acres of wetlands. The connection roads and interchanges component of the project would require 97 acres of right-of-way and would displace nine residences, and four businesses. The Old Plank Trail component of the project would require 102 acres of new right-of-way and would displace 12 acres of wetlands. The corridor preservation alternatives would require additional acreage at the time transportation improvements are implemented. The project would affect habitat for federal protected species and encroach on floodplains. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and supplemental draft EISs, see 05-0395D, Volume 29, Number 3 and 10-0139D, Volume 34, Number 1, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100228, Final EIS--429 pages and maps, Appendices--460 pages and maps, June 17, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-04-03-F KW - Demography KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/816526919?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-12 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 17, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Periodic NDE for Bridge Maintenance T2 - Structural Faults & Repair 2010 AN - 754283148; 5819230 JF - Structural Faults & Repair 2010 AU - Arndt, R AU - Jalinoos, F AU - Cui, J AU - Huston, D Y1 - 2010/06/15/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Jun 15 KW - Maintenance KW - U 7000:Multidisciplinary UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754283148?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=Structural+Faults+%26+Repair+2010&rft.atitle=Periodic+NDE+for+Bridge+Maintenance&rft.au=Arndt%2C+R%3BJalinoos%2C+F%3BCui%2C+J%3BHuston%2C+D&rft.aulast=Arndt&rft.aufirst=R&rft.date=2010-06-15&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Structural+Faults+%26+Repair+2010&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.structuralfaultsandrepair.com/Abstract%20book%20highres%20M LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 13 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132220; 14372-3_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132220?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 12 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132204; 14372-3_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132204?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 14 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873131161; 14373-4_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131161?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 20 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130974; 14372-3_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130974?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 19 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130926; 14372-3_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130926?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 18 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130915; 14372-3_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130915?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 17 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130905; 14372-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130905?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 16 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130897; 14372-3_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130897?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 12 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873130888; 14370-1_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130888?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 11 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873130884; 14370-1_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130884?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 10 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873130877; 14370-1_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130877?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 11 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130875; 14372-3_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130875?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 9 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873130868; 14370-1_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130868?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 10 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130867; 14372-3_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130867?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 8 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873130859; 14370-1_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130859?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 7 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873130851; 14370-1_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130851?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 6 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873130843; 14370-1_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130843?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 16 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873130222; 14373-4_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130222?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 15 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873130214; 14373-4_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130214?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 13 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873130202; 14373-4_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130202?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 12 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129797; 14373-4_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129797?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 11 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129787; 14373-4_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129787?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 7 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129775; 14373-4_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129775?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 6 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129763; 14373-4_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129763?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 5 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129758; 14373-4_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129758?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 4 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129739; 14373-4_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129739?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 3 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129687; 14373-4_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129687?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 2 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129676; 14373-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129676?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 1 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129651; 14373-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129651?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 10 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129179; 14373-4_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129179?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 9 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129165; 14373-4_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129165?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 8 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 873129154; 14373-4_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129154?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 9 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128299; 14372-3_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128299?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 8 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128289; 14372-3_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128289?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 7 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128282; 14372-3_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128282?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 6 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128275; 14372-3_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128275?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 5 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128268; 14372-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128268?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 4 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128255; 14372-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128255?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 3 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128248; 14372-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128248?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 2 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128243; 14372-3_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128243?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 1 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128237; 14372-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128237?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 14 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873128229; 14370-1_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128229?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 13 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873128223; 14370-1_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128223?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 5 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873128220; 14370-1_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128220?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 4 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873128217; 14370-1_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128217?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 3 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873128210; 14370-1_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128210?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 2 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873128205; 14370-1_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128205?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. [Part 1 of 14] T2 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 873128202; 14370-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128202?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 15 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873127213; 14372-3_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127213?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 14 of 20] T2 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873127208; 14372-3_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127208?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 754908420; 14373 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements between U.S. Interstate 15 (I-15) and Provo Municipal Airport, Provo, Utah are proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo which includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties in the project area, which is bordered on the south and west by Utah Lake and on the east by I-15, are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. The proposed improvements would include construction of a new, five-lane, arterial roadway known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. Both University Avenue alternatives would include a provision for public balloting regarding construction of a noise wall along the southern border of the Lakeview neighborhood. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed new roadway would provide a connection to the existing transportation network to support planned development in southwest Provo and would support planned improvements at the Provo Airport and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 108.5 to 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 to 24,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetlands, 65.3 to 77.1 acres of floodplains, 85.9 to 93.7 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, 13.1 to 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat, and 5.2 to 9.3 acres of wetland habitat. Under the University Avenue alternatives, 23 residences would experience significant noise increases and the Lakewood neighborhood would experience significant and permanent impacts to visual quality. The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100214, 530 pages and maps, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-D KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908420?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salt Lake City, Utah; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 15 (I-15) CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AND LOCAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NEON), LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. AN - 754908404; 14370 AB - PURPOSE: Major highway improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor and local arteries, Clark County, Las Vegas, Nevada are proposed. Project NEON, as it is known, extends from the Sahara Avenue interchange on the south to the I-15/US Highway 95 (US 95)/I-515 interchange (the Las Vegas Spaghetti Bowl) on the north. The I-15 corridor, including Project NEON, serves the Las Vegas Valley as a transportation artery through downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, a 30-square-mile area centered on the Las Vegas strip, extending from downtown Las Vegas to new resorts and commercial developments being built south of I-215. It includes the Las Vegas Convention Center, several near-strip resorts, McCarran International Airport, and the University of Nevada Las Vegas campus. The project covers a distance of 3.7 miles on I-15 and integrates several major highway improvement components: expanding and improving the I-15 mainline, including high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, between Sahara Avenue and US 95; reconstructing the I-15/Charleston Boulevard interchange; adding freeway access near Alta Drive; grade separating Oakey Boulevard/Wyoming Avenue and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) tracks; and creating a new arterial roadway connection over I-15, Charleston Boulevard, and the UPRR by connecting Martin Luther King Boulevard and Industrial Road. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, and two reasonable build alternatives which evolved from a structured alternatives development and evaluation process conducted between fall 2003 and 2009. Alternative G, which is the preferred alternative, would provide four to five through lanes (depending on the location), two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and also four to five through lanes, two HOV lanes, and auxiliary lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. A direct connector ramp would enhance the connection from northbound I-15 to northbound US 95. A similar ramp would enhance the connection between southbound US 95 and southbound I-15. South of Oakey Boulevard, Alternative G would shift the freeway centerline to the east, minimizing impacts to existing drainage facilities. The proposed action would improve the Martin Luther King Boulevard/Industrial Road Connector, including grade separating Oakey Boulevard and Wyoming Avenue over the Union Pacific Railroad and Industrial Road, and would reconstruct the Charleston Boulevard interchange (including improvements to Grand Central Parkway) and construct a half-diamond interchange at Alta Drive. Alternative H would provide four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for northbound I-15 traffic, and four to five through lanes and two HOV lanes for southbound I-15 traffic. It would have northbound and southbound collector-distributor roads to safely carry vehicles entering and exiting I-15 separate from the through lanes. The other major features of Alternative H are the same as those for Alternative G. Total cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $1.4 to $1.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address existing and future corridor deficiencies related to traffic demand/capacity, crash rates, operational deficiencies, and system linkage by separating freeway traffic from arterial traffic, reducing the merge and diverge sections where traffic entering or exiting the interstate conflicts with through traffic, and increasing I-15 capacity. It would accommodate economic redevelopment through improved access to downtown Las Vegas and the resort corridor, and it would accommodate traffic that would use HOV lanes from Sahara Avenue to existing HOV lanes on US 95. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project would: convert up to 115 acres of land for transportation use; require 345 residential displacements and 445 to 456 commercial displacements; impact 35 to 37 noise receptors remove up to 1,810 parking spaces; and affect 24 historic sites. LEGAL MANDATES: National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Uniform Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0436D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100211, Final EIS--412 pages and maps, Final EIS and Supplementary Material--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NV-EIS-09-01-F KW - Airports KW - Central Business Districts KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Nevada KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908404?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+15+%28I-15%29+CORRIDOR+IMPROVEMENTS+AND+LOCAL+ARTERIAL+IMPROVEMENTS+%28PROJECT+NEON%29%2C+LAS+VEGAS%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Carson City, Nevada; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PENNSYLVANIA HIGH-SPEED MAGLEV PROJECT: THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT OF MAGNETIC LEVIATION TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM, ALLEGHENY AND WESTMORELAND COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 754908309; 14372 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project in Allegheny and Westmoreland Counties, Pennsylvania are proposed. High-speed maglev technology utilizes non-contact, electromagnetic forces to levitate, guide, and propel vehicles along a fixed guideway. In accordance with the congressional directives of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) completed a Programmatic EIS in April 2000 for the Magnetic Levitation Transportation Technology Deployment Program, identified alternative approaches, and demonstrated the suitability of this transportation technology. In June 2001, the FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), advancing the Pennsylvania High-speed Maglev Project into the site-specific EIS phase of the program. Preliminary alternatives were developed, including intermodal connections, no-build and build alternative maglev alignments and passenger station locations, and roadway improvements associated with the proposed stations. The project would be constructed between Pittsburgh International Airport (PIA), the City of Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area (all in Allegheny County), and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area in Westmoreland County. This final EIS considers the No-Build Alternative and the environmentally preferred build alternative, consisting of the A-5 South alignment, B-4 West alignment, and the C6 alignment. The proposed project would extend for 54 miles with an additional three miles to accommodate guideway access to the visitor/maintenance facility near PIA. The proposed action would also include the construction of five passenger stations and associated roadway improvements to provide or improve access to the stations. Passenger stations would be located at the PIA Landside Terminal, nearby at Enlow Road, in Downtown Pittsburgh at Steel Plaza, in the Monroeville/Penn Hills area at Thompson Run, and in the Greensburg/Hempfield area at the Toll Route 66/Route 136 interchange. A risk-based assessment utilizing an 80 percent probability projects Section A becoming operational by the end of 2013, Section B becoming operational by mid 2014, and Section C becoming operational by the end of 2015. The cost of developing the system is now estimated to be $5.325 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, including all capital costs and associated roadway improvements. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would encourage transfer of maglev technology to other areas of the United States currently investigating the feasibility of similar transportation systems; provide rapid, convenient, and reliable transportation between major population and employment centers and the PIA. More specifically, the system would extend the existing airport, transit, and highway infrastructure beyond current expected usefulness; maximize the utilization and capability of PIA by providing intermodal connections at PIA, Pittsburgh, the Monroeville/Penn Hills area, and the Greensburg/Hempfield Township area; improve regional air quality; facilitate joint development opportunities at maglev station areas; promote regional economic development; and support comprehensive land use planning and smart growth initiatives. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would result in the displacement of residences and businesses, wetlands, stream channel, floodplain, forested land, rangeland, and wildlife habitat, including habitat for special status bat, bird, and plant species. Two historic sites and five parkland resources would be affected by project implementation. Construction workers would encounter sites containing contaminated materials, including hazardous wastes. There would be 92 potential severe noise impacts to single residences within the preferred alignment. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0015D, Volume 30, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100213, Final EIS--696 pages, Draft EIS--CD-ROM, June 3, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FRA-PA-EIS-02-01-F KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Ranges KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Pennsylvania KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908309?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PENNSYLVANIA+HIGH-SPEED+MAGLEV+PROJECT%3A+THE+PENNSYLVANIA+PROJECT+OF+MAGNETIC+LEVIATION+TRANSPORTATION+TECHNOLOGY+DEPLOYMENT+PROGRAM%2C+ALLEGHENY+AND+WESTMORELAND+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 26 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130687; 14368-9_0026 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130687?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 25 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130671; 14368-9_0025 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130671?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 24 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130658; 14368-9_0024 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130658?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 23 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130642; 14368-9_0023 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130642?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 18 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130629; 14368-9_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130629?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 17 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130611; 14368-9_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130611?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 8 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130589; 14368-9_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130589?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 7 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130579; 14368-9_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130579?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 6 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130565; 14368-9_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130565?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 5 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130556; 14368-9_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130556?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 1 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130550; 14368-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130550?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 38 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130337; 14368-9_0038 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130337?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 37 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130326; 14368-9_0037 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130326?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 36 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130319; 14368-9_0036 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130319?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 35 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130309; 14368-9_0035 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130309?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 33 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130296; 14368-9_0033 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130296?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 32 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130286; 14368-9_0032 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130286?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 29 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130276; 14368-9_0029 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130276?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 28 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130263; 14368-9_0028 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130263?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 16 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130253; 14368-9_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130253?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 10 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130238; 14368-9_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130238?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 9 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130227; 14368-9_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130227?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 3 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129515; 14368-9_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129515?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 31 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129186; 14368-9_0031 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129186?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 30 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129156; 14368-9_0030 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129156?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 22 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129136; 14368-9_0022 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129136?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 21 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129126; 14368-9_0021 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129126?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 20 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129113; 14368-9_0020 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129113?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 19 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129095; 14368-9_0019 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129095?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 15 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129070; 14368-9_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129070?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 14 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129048; 14368-9_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129048?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 13 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129030; 14368-9_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129030?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 12 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873129010; 14368-9_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129010?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 11 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873128987; 14368-9_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128987?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 2 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873128964; 14368-9_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128964?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 34 of 38] T2 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873128832; 14368-9_0034 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128832?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MONROE CONNECTOR/BYPASS FROM US 74 NEAR I-485 TO US 74 BETWEEN WINGATE AND MARSHVILLE, MECKLENBERG AND UNION COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 15236420; 14368 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a 20-mile controlled-access toll road, to be known as the Monroe Connector/Bypass, extending from US 74 near I-485 in Mecklenberg County to US 74 between the towns of Wingate and Marshville in Union County, North Carolina is proposed. The project area lies southeast of Charlotte in the southern part of the Piedmont region. US 74 is the primary transportation route between Union County, the fastest growing county in North Carolina, and Mecklenberg County and Charlotte, the economic hub of the region. US 74 also serves as an important commercial corridor for Union County, with many residential, commercial, and employment centers having direct access to and from US 74. In Union County, most employment is concentrated in the City of Monroe or along existing US 74. Approximately 63 percent of total crashes recorded for the 23 intersections along US 74 within the project study area involved rear-end collisions, indicating excessive traffic volumes and a substantial number of interruptions to traffic flow. A three-step screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of alternatives and to determine the detailed study alternatives (DSAs). Preliminary corridor segments were developed, qualitatively assessed, and compared with respect to potential impacts. Segments with relatively high impacts were eliminated. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to noise, visual resources, air quality, and impacts to North Fork Crooked Creek. In addition to a No Build Alternative, 16 DSAs are analyzed in this final EIS. Each DSA would have nine or ten interchanges and all would include an electronic toll system. DSA D, one of the shortest alternatives at 19.7 miles, is the recommended alternative and is comprised of DSA segments 2, 21, 30, 31, 36, 36A, and 40. Estimated cost of DSA D is $777.4 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would improve mobility and capacity within the project area by providing a facility for the US 74 corridor serving high-speed travel. Access to a toll road would relieve the congestion on US 74 where average travel speeds currently range from 20 to 30 miles per hour during the peak hour and are expected to decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would have indirect, adverse effects on water quality from soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction along the selected DSA's right-of-way would result in loss of foraging and breeding habitat for various local wildlife species. The potential access improvements likely would increase residential suburbanization. All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses, impacting nine neighborhoods. Implementation of DSA D would relocate 107 residences, 45 businesses, and three farms. The project could accelerate land use changes and change the character of neighborhoods. Natural resource impacts would include 499 acres of farmland, 450 acres of upland forest, 2.6 acres of ponds, 8.1 acres of wetlands, and 9,794 feet of perennial streams. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0198D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100209, Volume 1--210 pages and maps, Volume 2: Appendices--450 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--428 pages; and CD-ROM, June 1, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/15236420?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-06-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MONROE+CONNECTOR%2FBYPASS+FROM+US+74+NEAR+I-485+TO+US+74+BETWEEN+WINGATE+AND+MARSHVILLE%2C+MECKLENBERG+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-04 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: June 1, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 1 of 6] T2 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 756827341; 14357-100206_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of an 11-mile, four-travel lane, access-controlled expressway around the cities of Newberg and Dundee in Yamhill County, Oregon is proposed. The Newberg Dundee Bypass (Bypass) project would include the Bypass, four interchanges, and changes to local roads and streets that need to be relocated for the Bypass. Over the last 10 years, traffic on Oregon 99W in downtown Newberg and Dundee has increased 40 percent. By 2030, traffic is estimated to increase another 40 to 80 percent. Throughout the week, traffic on Oregon 99W backs up for more than a mile in both directions through Dundee, where Oregon 99W has only one travel lane in each direction. The Tier 1 process for the proposed project resulted in a 2005 Record of Decision which selected the Bypass Approved Corridor (Corridor) as the location to build the proposed project. This Tier 2 draft EIS presents more detailed information on existing conditions in the project area, and evaluates a No Build Alternative and the Build Alternative with its various design options and local circulation options. The design options in the Build Alternative provide choices for the Bypass roadway and interchanges, while local circulation options provide choices for the changes to local roads and streets that would be needed because of the Bypass. The Bypass would be located along the south sides of Newberg and Dundee, extending from the Oregon 99W/Oregon 18 junction near Dayton (approximately Oregon 18 milepost 51.6) to just past the top of Rex Hill, east of Newberg (approximately Oregon 99W milepost 19.6). The four interchanges would include locations at each end of the Bypass (Dayton Interchange and East Newberg Interchange) and at two intermediate locations (East Dundee Interchange and Oregon 219 Interchange). Local circulation changes would include reconnections of local roads and streets that are disrupted by the Bypass and locations for local roads crossing over the Bypass. The Build Alternative would have the following characteristics throughout its entire length: operating speeds of 55 miles per hour; four mainline travel lanes (two in each direction), each 12 feet wide; paved shoulders (4 feet wide inside and 10 to 12 feet wide outside); full access control along the Bypass; an average median width of 42 feet; and stormwater control features. In addition, Oregon 99W would remain the designated bicycle route through the Newberg and Dundee area. If the Bypass is constructed, existing Oregon 99W is anticipated to become Oregon 99W (Business). Total construction costs are estimated at $753 to $880 million with an estimated construction start date of 2015. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the Bypass would reduce congestion on Oregon 99W through Newberg and Dundee by redirecting traffic traveling through these communities to the Bypass. Newberg and Dundee would have less congestion and noise along Oregon 99W, allowing both cities to make their downtowns more pedestrian friendly and more enjoyable places to spend time, along with safer and faster travel for through traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the Build Alternative would require acquisition of 446 to 461 total acres and relocation of 95 to 103 residences and 26 businesses. Construction would impact 5.3 acres of wetlands and 77 to 80 acres of wildlife habitat and result in noise impacts to 237 to 311 residences and significant adverse visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 03-0090D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 05-0646F, Volume 29, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100206, 946 pages and maps, May 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-01-D KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Land Use KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827341?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 5 of 6] T2 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 756827334; 14357-100206_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of an 11-mile, four-travel lane, access-controlled expressway around the cities of Newberg and Dundee in Yamhill County, Oregon is proposed. The Newberg Dundee Bypass (Bypass) project would include the Bypass, four interchanges, and changes to local roads and streets that need to be relocated for the Bypass. Over the last 10 years, traffic on Oregon 99W in downtown Newberg and Dundee has increased 40 percent. By 2030, traffic is estimated to increase another 40 to 80 percent. Throughout the week, traffic on Oregon 99W backs up for more than a mile in both directions through Dundee, where Oregon 99W has only one travel lane in each direction. The Tier 1 process for the proposed project resulted in a 2005 Record of Decision which selected the Bypass Approved Corridor (Corridor) as the location to build the proposed project. This Tier 2 draft EIS presents more detailed information on existing conditions in the project area, and evaluates a No Build Alternative and the Build Alternative with its various design options and local circulation options. The design options in the Build Alternative provide choices for the Bypass roadway and interchanges, while local circulation options provide choices for the changes to local roads and streets that would be needed because of the Bypass. The Bypass would be located along the south sides of Newberg and Dundee, extending from the Oregon 99W/Oregon 18 junction near Dayton (approximately Oregon 18 milepost 51.6) to just past the top of Rex Hill, east of Newberg (approximately Oregon 99W milepost 19.6). The four interchanges would include locations at each end of the Bypass (Dayton Interchange and East Newberg Interchange) and at two intermediate locations (East Dundee Interchange and Oregon 219 Interchange). Local circulation changes would include reconnections of local roads and streets that are disrupted by the Bypass and locations for local roads crossing over the Bypass. The Build Alternative would have the following characteristics throughout its entire length: operating speeds of 55 miles per hour; four mainline travel lanes (two in each direction), each 12 feet wide; paved shoulders (4 feet wide inside and 10 to 12 feet wide outside); full access control along the Bypass; an average median width of 42 feet; and stormwater control features. In addition, Oregon 99W would remain the designated bicycle route through the Newberg and Dundee area. If the Bypass is constructed, existing Oregon 99W is anticipated to become Oregon 99W (Business). Total construction costs are estimated at $753 to $880 million with an estimated construction start date of 2015. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the Bypass would reduce congestion on Oregon 99W through Newberg and Dundee by redirecting traffic traveling through these communities to the Bypass. Newberg and Dundee would have less congestion and noise along Oregon 99W, allowing both cities to make their downtowns more pedestrian friendly and more enjoyable places to spend time, along with safer and faster travel for through traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the Build Alternative would require acquisition of 446 to 461 total acres and relocation of 95 to 103 residences and 26 businesses. Construction would impact 5.3 acres of wetlands and 77 to 80 acres of wildlife habitat and result in noise impacts to 237 to 311 residences and significant adverse visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 03-0090D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 05-0646F, Volume 29, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100206, 946 pages and maps, May 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-01-D KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Land Use KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827334?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 4 of 6] T2 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 756827330; 14357-100206_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of an 11-mile, four-travel lane, access-controlled expressway around the cities of Newberg and Dundee in Yamhill County, Oregon is proposed. The Newberg Dundee Bypass (Bypass) project would include the Bypass, four interchanges, and changes to local roads and streets that need to be relocated for the Bypass. Over the last 10 years, traffic on Oregon 99W in downtown Newberg and Dundee has increased 40 percent. By 2030, traffic is estimated to increase another 40 to 80 percent. Throughout the week, traffic on Oregon 99W backs up for more than a mile in both directions through Dundee, where Oregon 99W has only one travel lane in each direction. The Tier 1 process for the proposed project resulted in a 2005 Record of Decision which selected the Bypass Approved Corridor (Corridor) as the location to build the proposed project. This Tier 2 draft EIS presents more detailed information on existing conditions in the project area, and evaluates a No Build Alternative and the Build Alternative with its various design options and local circulation options. The design options in the Build Alternative provide choices for the Bypass roadway and interchanges, while local circulation options provide choices for the changes to local roads and streets that would be needed because of the Bypass. The Bypass would be located along the south sides of Newberg and Dundee, extending from the Oregon 99W/Oregon 18 junction near Dayton (approximately Oregon 18 milepost 51.6) to just past the top of Rex Hill, east of Newberg (approximately Oregon 99W milepost 19.6). The four interchanges would include locations at each end of the Bypass (Dayton Interchange and East Newberg Interchange) and at two intermediate locations (East Dundee Interchange and Oregon 219 Interchange). Local circulation changes would include reconnections of local roads and streets that are disrupted by the Bypass and locations for local roads crossing over the Bypass. The Build Alternative would have the following characteristics throughout its entire length: operating speeds of 55 miles per hour; four mainline travel lanes (two in each direction), each 12 feet wide; paved shoulders (4 feet wide inside and 10 to 12 feet wide outside); full access control along the Bypass; an average median width of 42 feet; and stormwater control features. In addition, Oregon 99W would remain the designated bicycle route through the Newberg and Dundee area. If the Bypass is constructed, existing Oregon 99W is anticipated to become Oregon 99W (Business). Total construction costs are estimated at $753 to $880 million with an estimated construction start date of 2015. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the Bypass would reduce congestion on Oregon 99W through Newberg and Dundee by redirecting traffic traveling through these communities to the Bypass. Newberg and Dundee would have less congestion and noise along Oregon 99W, allowing both cities to make their downtowns more pedestrian friendly and more enjoyable places to spend time, along with safer and faster travel for through traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the Build Alternative would require acquisition of 446 to 461 total acres and relocation of 95 to 103 residences and 26 businesses. Construction would impact 5.3 acres of wetlands and 77 to 80 acres of wildlife habitat and result in noise impacts to 237 to 311 residences and significant adverse visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 03-0090D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 05-0646F, Volume 29, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100206, 946 pages and maps, May 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-01-D KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Land Use KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827330?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 2 of 6] T2 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 756827324; 14357-100206_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of an 11-mile, four-travel lane, access-controlled expressway around the cities of Newberg and Dundee in Yamhill County, Oregon is proposed. The Newberg Dundee Bypass (Bypass) project would include the Bypass, four interchanges, and changes to local roads and streets that need to be relocated for the Bypass. Over the last 10 years, traffic on Oregon 99W in downtown Newberg and Dundee has increased 40 percent. By 2030, traffic is estimated to increase another 40 to 80 percent. Throughout the week, traffic on Oregon 99W backs up for more than a mile in both directions through Dundee, where Oregon 99W has only one travel lane in each direction. The Tier 1 process for the proposed project resulted in a 2005 Record of Decision which selected the Bypass Approved Corridor (Corridor) as the location to build the proposed project. This Tier 2 draft EIS presents more detailed information on existing conditions in the project area, and evaluates a No Build Alternative and the Build Alternative with its various design options and local circulation options. The design options in the Build Alternative provide choices for the Bypass roadway and interchanges, while local circulation options provide choices for the changes to local roads and streets that would be needed because of the Bypass. The Bypass would be located along the south sides of Newberg and Dundee, extending from the Oregon 99W/Oregon 18 junction near Dayton (approximately Oregon 18 milepost 51.6) to just past the top of Rex Hill, east of Newberg (approximately Oregon 99W milepost 19.6). The four interchanges would include locations at each end of the Bypass (Dayton Interchange and East Newberg Interchange) and at two intermediate locations (East Dundee Interchange and Oregon 219 Interchange). Local circulation changes would include reconnections of local roads and streets that are disrupted by the Bypass and locations for local roads crossing over the Bypass. The Build Alternative would have the following characteristics throughout its entire length: operating speeds of 55 miles per hour; four mainline travel lanes (two in each direction), each 12 feet wide; paved shoulders (4 feet wide inside and 10 to 12 feet wide outside); full access control along the Bypass; an average median width of 42 feet; and stormwater control features. In addition, Oregon 99W would remain the designated bicycle route through the Newberg and Dundee area. If the Bypass is constructed, existing Oregon 99W is anticipated to become Oregon 99W (Business). Total construction costs are estimated at $753 to $880 million with an estimated construction start date of 2015. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the Bypass would reduce congestion on Oregon 99W through Newberg and Dundee by redirecting traffic traveling through these communities to the Bypass. Newberg and Dundee would have less congestion and noise along Oregon 99W, allowing both cities to make their downtowns more pedestrian friendly and more enjoyable places to spend time, along with safer and faster travel for through traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the Build Alternative would require acquisition of 446 to 461 total acres and relocation of 95 to 103 residences and 26 businesses. Construction would impact 5.3 acres of wetlands and 77 to 80 acres of wildlife habitat and result in noise impacts to 237 to 311 residences and significant adverse visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 03-0090D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 05-0646F, Volume 29, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100206, 946 pages and maps, May 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-01-D KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Land Use KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827324?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 6 of 6] T2 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 756827162; 14357-100206_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of an 11-mile, four-travel lane, access-controlled expressway around the cities of Newberg and Dundee in Yamhill County, Oregon is proposed. The Newberg Dundee Bypass (Bypass) project would include the Bypass, four interchanges, and changes to local roads and streets that need to be relocated for the Bypass. Over the last 10 years, traffic on Oregon 99W in downtown Newberg and Dundee has increased 40 percent. By 2030, traffic is estimated to increase another 40 to 80 percent. Throughout the week, traffic on Oregon 99W backs up for more than a mile in both directions through Dundee, where Oregon 99W has only one travel lane in each direction. The Tier 1 process for the proposed project resulted in a 2005 Record of Decision which selected the Bypass Approved Corridor (Corridor) as the location to build the proposed project. This Tier 2 draft EIS presents more detailed information on existing conditions in the project area, and evaluates a No Build Alternative and the Build Alternative with its various design options and local circulation options. The design options in the Build Alternative provide choices for the Bypass roadway and interchanges, while local circulation options provide choices for the changes to local roads and streets that would be needed because of the Bypass. The Bypass would be located along the south sides of Newberg and Dundee, extending from the Oregon 99W/Oregon 18 junction near Dayton (approximately Oregon 18 milepost 51.6) to just past the top of Rex Hill, east of Newberg (approximately Oregon 99W milepost 19.6). The four interchanges would include locations at each end of the Bypass (Dayton Interchange and East Newberg Interchange) and at two intermediate locations (East Dundee Interchange and Oregon 219 Interchange). Local circulation changes would include reconnections of local roads and streets that are disrupted by the Bypass and locations for local roads crossing over the Bypass. The Build Alternative would have the following characteristics throughout its entire length: operating speeds of 55 miles per hour; four mainline travel lanes (two in each direction), each 12 feet wide; paved shoulders (4 feet wide inside and 10 to 12 feet wide outside); full access control along the Bypass; an average median width of 42 feet; and stormwater control features. In addition, Oregon 99W would remain the designated bicycle route through the Newberg and Dundee area. If the Bypass is constructed, existing Oregon 99W is anticipated to become Oregon 99W (Business). Total construction costs are estimated at $753 to $880 million with an estimated construction start date of 2015. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the Bypass would reduce congestion on Oregon 99W through Newberg and Dundee by redirecting traffic traveling through these communities to the Bypass. Newberg and Dundee would have less congestion and noise along Oregon 99W, allowing both cities to make their downtowns more pedestrian friendly and more enjoyable places to spend time, along with safer and faster travel for through traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the Build Alternative would require acquisition of 446 to 461 total acres and relocation of 95 to 103 residences and 26 businesses. Construction would impact 5.3 acres of wetlands and 77 to 80 acres of wildlife habitat and result in noise impacts to 237 to 311 residences and significant adverse visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 03-0090D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 05-0646F, Volume 29, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100206, 946 pages and maps, May 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-01-D KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Land Use KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827162?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. [Part 3 of 6] T2 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 756827153; 14357-100206_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of an 11-mile, four-travel lane, access-controlled expressway around the cities of Newberg and Dundee in Yamhill County, Oregon is proposed. The Newberg Dundee Bypass (Bypass) project would include the Bypass, four interchanges, and changes to local roads and streets that need to be relocated for the Bypass. Over the last 10 years, traffic on Oregon 99W in downtown Newberg and Dundee has increased 40 percent. By 2030, traffic is estimated to increase another 40 to 80 percent. Throughout the week, traffic on Oregon 99W backs up for more than a mile in both directions through Dundee, where Oregon 99W has only one travel lane in each direction. The Tier 1 process for the proposed project resulted in a 2005 Record of Decision which selected the Bypass Approved Corridor (Corridor) as the location to build the proposed project. This Tier 2 draft EIS presents more detailed information on existing conditions in the project area, and evaluates a No Build Alternative and the Build Alternative with its various design options and local circulation options. The design options in the Build Alternative provide choices for the Bypass roadway and interchanges, while local circulation options provide choices for the changes to local roads and streets that would be needed because of the Bypass. The Bypass would be located along the south sides of Newberg and Dundee, extending from the Oregon 99W/Oregon 18 junction near Dayton (approximately Oregon 18 milepost 51.6) to just past the top of Rex Hill, east of Newberg (approximately Oregon 99W milepost 19.6). The four interchanges would include locations at each end of the Bypass (Dayton Interchange and East Newberg Interchange) and at two intermediate locations (East Dundee Interchange and Oregon 219 Interchange). Local circulation changes would include reconnections of local roads and streets that are disrupted by the Bypass and locations for local roads crossing over the Bypass. The Build Alternative would have the following characteristics throughout its entire length: operating speeds of 55 miles per hour; four mainline travel lanes (two in each direction), each 12 feet wide; paved shoulders (4 feet wide inside and 10 to 12 feet wide outside); full access control along the Bypass; an average median width of 42 feet; and stormwater control features. In addition, Oregon 99W would remain the designated bicycle route through the Newberg and Dundee area. If the Bypass is constructed, existing Oregon 99W is anticipated to become Oregon 99W (Business). Total construction costs are estimated at $753 to $880 million with an estimated construction start date of 2015. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the Bypass would reduce congestion on Oregon 99W through Newberg and Dundee by redirecting traffic traveling through these communities to the Bypass. Newberg and Dundee would have less congestion and noise along Oregon 99W, allowing both cities to make their downtowns more pedestrian friendly and more enjoyable places to spend time, along with safer and faster travel for through traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the Build Alternative would require acquisition of 446 to 461 total acres and relocation of 95 to 103 residences and 26 businesses. Construction would impact 5.3 acres of wetlands and 77 to 80 acres of wildlife habitat and result in noise impacts to 237 to 311 residences and significant adverse visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 03-0090D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 05-0646F, Volume 29, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100206, 946 pages and maps, May 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-01-D KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Land Use KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827153?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEWBERG DUNDEE BYPASS PROJECT, YAMHILL AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES, OREGON. AN - 754907814; 14357 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of an 11-mile, four-travel lane, access-controlled expressway around the cities of Newberg and Dundee in Yamhill County, Oregon is proposed. The Newberg Dundee Bypass (Bypass) project would include the Bypass, four interchanges, and changes to local roads and streets that need to be relocated for the Bypass. Over the last 10 years, traffic on Oregon 99W in downtown Newberg and Dundee has increased 40 percent. By 2030, traffic is estimated to increase another 40 to 80 percent. Throughout the week, traffic on Oregon 99W backs up for more than a mile in both directions through Dundee, where Oregon 99W has only one travel lane in each direction. The Tier 1 process for the proposed project resulted in a 2005 Record of Decision which selected the Bypass Approved Corridor (Corridor) as the location to build the proposed project. This Tier 2 draft EIS presents more detailed information on existing conditions in the project area, and evaluates a No Build Alternative and the Build Alternative with its various design options and local circulation options. The design options in the Build Alternative provide choices for the Bypass roadway and interchanges, while local circulation options provide choices for the changes to local roads and streets that would be needed because of the Bypass. The Bypass would be located along the south sides of Newberg and Dundee, extending from the Oregon 99W/Oregon 18 junction near Dayton (approximately Oregon 18 milepost 51.6) to just past the top of Rex Hill, east of Newberg (approximately Oregon 99W milepost 19.6). The four interchanges would include locations at each end of the Bypass (Dayton Interchange and East Newberg Interchange) and at two intermediate locations (East Dundee Interchange and Oregon 219 Interchange). Local circulation changes would include reconnections of local roads and streets that are disrupted by the Bypass and locations for local roads crossing over the Bypass. The Build Alternative would have the following characteristics throughout its entire length: operating speeds of 55 miles per hour; four mainline travel lanes (two in each direction), each 12 feet wide; paved shoulders (4 feet wide inside and 10 to 12 feet wide outside); full access control along the Bypass; an average median width of 42 feet; and stormwater control features. In addition, Oregon 99W would remain the designated bicycle route through the Newberg and Dundee area. If the Bypass is constructed, existing Oregon 99W is anticipated to become Oregon 99W (Business). Total construction costs are estimated at $753 to $880 million with an estimated construction start date of 2015. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the Bypass would reduce congestion on Oregon 99W through Newberg and Dundee by redirecting traffic traveling through these communities to the Bypass. Newberg and Dundee would have less congestion and noise along Oregon 99W, allowing both cities to make their downtowns more pedestrian friendly and more enjoyable places to spend time, along with safer and faster travel for through traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the Build Alternative would require acquisition of 446 to 461 total acres and relocation of 95 to 103 residences and 26 businesses. Construction would impact 5.3 acres of wetlands and 77 to 80 acres of wildlife habitat and result in noise impacts to 237 to 311 residences and significant adverse visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 03-0090D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 05-0646F, Volume 29, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100206, 946 pages and maps, May 28, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-10-01-D KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Land Use KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Oregon KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754907814?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=NEWBERG+DUNDEE+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+YAMHILL+AND+WASHINGTON+COUNTIES%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Salem, Oregon; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARIANA ISLANDS RANGE COMPLEX, PACIFIC OCEAN. [Part 1 of 3] T2 - MARIANA ISLANDS RANGE COMPLEX, PACIFIC OCEAN. AN - 873130643; 14355-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The assessment of a proposed 10-year planning horizon associated with Navy training, research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) activities, and associated range capabilities enhancements in the Mariana Islands Range Complex (MIRC) is presented. The MIRC study area lies in the Western Pacific and consists of three primary components: ocean surface and undersea areas, special use airspace, and training land areas. The ocean surface and undersea areas extend from the international waters South of Guam to north of Pagan and from the Pacific Ocean east of the Mariana Islands to the middle of the Philippine Sea, Pacific Ocean, and Exclusive Economic Zones of the United States and Micronesia. The range complex includes land ranges and training areas on Guam, Rota, Tinian, Saipan, and Farrallon de Medinilla, encompassing 64 square nautical miles. Special use airspace within the MIRC includes Warning Area 517, restricted airspace over Farrallon De Medinilla, and air traffic control assigned airspace encompassing 63,000 square nautical miles. For range management and scheduling purposes, the range complex is divided into training areas under different controlling authorities. MIRC-supported activities and training, RDT&E of military hardware, personnel, tactics, munitions, explosives, and electronic combat systems are described in this EIS. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, which would perpetuate the current training and RDT&E activities at the same levels of intensity as currently conducted, are considered in this final EIS. Action Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would meet the U.S. military services' current and near-term operational training requirements, including increased training activities to meet new training and capability requirements for personnel and platforms, and an overall increase in the number and types of training events, including major exercises, U.S. Marine Corps training activities, joint training operations involving U.S. allies, and the U.S. Air Force's Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance/Strike initiative at Andersen Air Force Base. Training activities would also be increased as a result of the acquisition and development of new Portal Underwater Tracking Range capabilities supporting anti-submarine warfare and new facilities capabilities supporting the Military Operations in Urban Terrain training program. Action Alternative 2 would include allocations proposed under the No Action Alternative and Alternative 1, as well as new activities related to additional major exercises. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would help to achieve and maintain Navy readiness using the MIRC to support and conduct current and future training and RDT&E activities, while enhancing training resources through investment in the range complex. The MIRC would enable the Navy to organize, train, equip, and maintain combat-ready forces to successfully fulfill their current and future global mission of winning wars, deterring aggression, and maintaining freedom of maritime movement. Due to its close proximity to forward-deployed forces in the Western Pacific, the MIRC would provide the most cost-effective and efficient alternative for supporting those forces. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Environmental and/or social stressors resulting from operations within MIRC would include vessel movement disturbance and vessel collisions; aircraft noise, including sonic booms; explosion of towed mine warfare devices and underwater detonations, explosion of high-explosive ordnance, disturbances caused by the use of non-explosive munitions; and detritus from expended material. The use of explosive munitions would release toxins into aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Underwater explosions and the use of sonar could affect the directional abilities of marine mammals, and a number of the animals would be injured or killed due to collisions with vessels. Explosives and ship movements would also place other marine organisms at risk, including coral reefs. Restrictions on airspace and Western Pacific operating areas would prevent the use of these areas by other transportation interests during operations, though such operations would invariably be of short duration. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0015D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100204, Volume 1--952 pages, Volume 2--873 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--1,170 pages, May 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Islands KW - Marine Mammals KW - Marine Surveys KW - Marine Systems KW - Military Operations (Joint) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Munitions KW - Ships KW - Sonic Booms KW - Submarines KW - Andersen Air Force Base KW - Guam KW - Mariana Islands KW - Micronesia KW - Pacific Ocean KW - Palau KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130643?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARIANA+ISLANDS+RANGE+COMPLEX%2C+PACIFIC+OCEAN.&rft.title=MARIANA+ISLANDS+RANGE+COMPLEX%2C+PACIFIC+OCEAN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARIANA ISLANDS RANGE COMPLEX, PACIFIC OCEAN. [Part 3 of 3] T2 - MARIANA ISLANDS RANGE COMPLEX, PACIFIC OCEAN. AN - 873129673; 14355-4_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The assessment of a proposed 10-year planning horizon associated with Navy training, research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) activities, and associated range capabilities enhancements in the Mariana Islands Range Complex (MIRC) is presented. The MIRC study area lies in the Western Pacific and consists of three primary components: ocean surface and undersea areas, special use airspace, and training land areas. The ocean surface and undersea areas extend from the international waters South of Guam to north of Pagan and from the Pacific Ocean east of the Mariana Islands to the middle of the Philippine Sea, Pacific Ocean, and Exclusive Economic Zones of the United States and Micronesia. The range complex includes land ranges and training areas on Guam, Rota, Tinian, Saipan, and Farrallon de Medinilla, encompassing 64 square nautical miles. Special use airspace within the MIRC includes Warning Area 517, restricted airspace over Farrallon De Medinilla, and air traffic control assigned airspace encompassing 63,000 square nautical miles. For range management and scheduling purposes, the range complex is divided into training areas under different controlling authorities. MIRC-supported activities and training, RDT&E of military hardware, personnel, tactics, munitions, explosives, and electronic combat systems are described in this EIS. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, which would perpetuate the current training and RDT&E activities at the same levels of intensity as currently conducted, are considered in this final EIS. Action Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would meet the U.S. military services' current and near-term operational training requirements, including increased training activities to meet new training and capability requirements for personnel and platforms, and an overall increase in the number and types of training events, including major exercises, U.S. Marine Corps training activities, joint training operations involving U.S. allies, and the U.S. Air Force's Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance/Strike initiative at Andersen Air Force Base. Training activities would also be increased as a result of the acquisition and development of new Portal Underwater Tracking Range capabilities supporting anti-submarine warfare and new facilities capabilities supporting the Military Operations in Urban Terrain training program. Action Alternative 2 would include allocations proposed under the No Action Alternative and Alternative 1, as well as new activities related to additional major exercises. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would help to achieve and maintain Navy readiness using the MIRC to support and conduct current and future training and RDT&E activities, while enhancing training resources through investment in the range complex. The MIRC would enable the Navy to organize, train, equip, and maintain combat-ready forces to successfully fulfill their current and future global mission of winning wars, deterring aggression, and maintaining freedom of maritime movement. Due to its close proximity to forward-deployed forces in the Western Pacific, the MIRC would provide the most cost-effective and efficient alternative for supporting those forces. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Environmental and/or social stressors resulting from operations within MIRC would include vessel movement disturbance and vessel collisions; aircraft noise, including sonic booms; explosion of towed mine warfare devices and underwater detonations, explosion of high-explosive ordnance, disturbances caused by the use of non-explosive munitions; and detritus from expended material. The use of explosive munitions would release toxins into aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Underwater explosions and the use of sonar could affect the directional abilities of marine mammals, and a number of the animals would be injured or killed due to collisions with vessels. Explosives and ship movements would also place other marine organisms at risk, including coral reefs. Restrictions on airspace and Western Pacific operating areas would prevent the use of these areas by other transportation interests during operations, though such operations would invariably be of short duration. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0015D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100204, Volume 1--952 pages, Volume 2--873 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--1,170 pages, May 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Islands KW - Marine Mammals KW - Marine Surveys KW - Marine Systems KW - Military Operations (Joint) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Munitions KW - Ships KW - Sonic Booms KW - Submarines KW - Andersen Air Force Base KW - Guam KW - Mariana Islands KW - Micronesia KW - Pacific Ocean KW - Palau KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129673?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARIANA+ISLANDS+RANGE+COMPLEX%2C+PACIFIC+OCEAN.&rft.title=MARIANA+ISLANDS+RANGE+COMPLEX%2C+PACIFIC+OCEAN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARIANA ISLANDS RANGE COMPLEX, PACIFIC OCEAN. [Part 2 of 3] T2 - MARIANA ISLANDS RANGE COMPLEX, PACIFIC OCEAN. AN - 873129316; 14355-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The assessment of a proposed 10-year planning horizon associated with Navy training, research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) activities, and associated range capabilities enhancements in the Mariana Islands Range Complex (MIRC) is presented. The MIRC study area lies in the Western Pacific and consists of three primary components: ocean surface and undersea areas, special use airspace, and training land areas. The ocean surface and undersea areas extend from the international waters South of Guam to north of Pagan and from the Pacific Ocean east of the Mariana Islands to the middle of the Philippine Sea, Pacific Ocean, and Exclusive Economic Zones of the United States and Micronesia. The range complex includes land ranges and training areas on Guam, Rota, Tinian, Saipan, and Farrallon de Medinilla, encompassing 64 square nautical miles. Special use airspace within the MIRC includes Warning Area 517, restricted airspace over Farrallon De Medinilla, and air traffic control assigned airspace encompassing 63,000 square nautical miles. For range management and scheduling purposes, the range complex is divided into training areas under different controlling authorities. MIRC-supported activities and training, RDT&E of military hardware, personnel, tactics, munitions, explosives, and electronic combat systems are described in this EIS. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, which would perpetuate the current training and RDT&E activities at the same levels of intensity as currently conducted, are considered in this final EIS. Action Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would meet the U.S. military services' current and near-term operational training requirements, including increased training activities to meet new training and capability requirements for personnel and platforms, and an overall increase in the number and types of training events, including major exercises, U.S. Marine Corps training activities, joint training operations involving U.S. allies, and the U.S. Air Force's Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance/Strike initiative at Andersen Air Force Base. Training activities would also be increased as a result of the acquisition and development of new Portal Underwater Tracking Range capabilities supporting anti-submarine warfare and new facilities capabilities supporting the Military Operations in Urban Terrain training program. Action Alternative 2 would include allocations proposed under the No Action Alternative and Alternative 1, as well as new activities related to additional major exercises. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would help to achieve and maintain Navy readiness using the MIRC to support and conduct current and future training and RDT&E activities, while enhancing training resources through investment in the range complex. The MIRC would enable the Navy to organize, train, equip, and maintain combat-ready forces to successfully fulfill their current and future global mission of winning wars, deterring aggression, and maintaining freedom of maritime movement. Due to its close proximity to forward-deployed forces in the Western Pacific, the MIRC would provide the most cost-effective and efficient alternative for supporting those forces. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Environmental and/or social stressors resulting from operations within MIRC would include vessel movement disturbance and vessel collisions; aircraft noise, including sonic booms; explosion of towed mine warfare devices and underwater detonations, explosion of high-explosive ordnance, disturbances caused by the use of non-explosive munitions; and detritus from expended material. The use of explosive munitions would release toxins into aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Underwater explosions and the use of sonar could affect the directional abilities of marine mammals, and a number of the animals would be injured or killed due to collisions with vessels. Explosives and ship movements would also place other marine organisms at risk, including coral reefs. Restrictions on airspace and Western Pacific operating areas would prevent the use of these areas by other transportation interests during operations, though such operations would invariably be of short duration. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0015D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100204, Volume 1--952 pages, Volume 2--873 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--1,170 pages, May 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Islands KW - Marine Mammals KW - Marine Surveys KW - Marine Systems KW - Military Operations (Joint) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Munitions KW - Ships KW - Sonic Booms KW - Submarines KW - Andersen Air Force Base KW - Guam KW - Mariana Islands KW - Micronesia KW - Pacific Ocean KW - Palau KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129316?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MARIANA+ISLANDS+RANGE+COMPLEX%2C+PACIFIC+OCEAN.&rft.title=MARIANA+ISLANDS+RANGE+COMPLEX%2C+PACIFIC+OCEAN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MARIANA ISLANDS RANGE COMPLEX, PACIFIC OCEAN. AN - 754907188; 14355 AB - PURPOSE: The assessment of a proposed 10-year planning horizon associated with Navy training, research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) activities, and associated range capabilities enhancements in the Mariana Islands Range Complex (MIRC) is presented. The MIRC study area lies in the Western Pacific and consists of three primary components: ocean surface and undersea areas, special use airspace, and training land areas. The ocean surface and undersea areas extend from the international waters South of Guam to north of Pagan and from the Pacific Ocean east of the Mariana Islands to the middle of the Philippine Sea, Pacific Ocean, and Exclusive Economic Zones of the United States and Micronesia. The range complex includes land ranges and training areas on Guam, Rota, Tinian, Saipan, and Farrallon de Medinilla, encompassing 64 square nautical miles. Special use airspace within the MIRC includes Warning Area 517, restricted airspace over Farrallon De Medinilla, and air traffic control assigned airspace encompassing 63,000 square nautical miles. For range management and scheduling purposes, the range complex is divided into training areas under different controlling authorities. MIRC-supported activities and training, RDT&E of military hardware, personnel, tactics, munitions, explosives, and electronic combat systems are described in this EIS. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, which would perpetuate the current training and RDT&E activities at the same levels of intensity as currently conducted, are considered in this final EIS. Action Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would meet the U.S. military services' current and near-term operational training requirements, including increased training activities to meet new training and capability requirements for personnel and platforms, and an overall increase in the number and types of training events, including major exercises, U.S. Marine Corps training activities, joint training operations involving U.S. allies, and the U.S. Air Force's Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance/Strike initiative at Andersen Air Force Base. Training activities would also be increased as a result of the acquisition and development of new Portal Underwater Tracking Range capabilities supporting anti-submarine warfare and new facilities capabilities supporting the Military Operations in Urban Terrain training program. Action Alternative 2 would include allocations proposed under the No Action Alternative and Alternative 1, as well as new activities related to additional major exercises. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would help to achieve and maintain Navy readiness using the MIRC to support and conduct current and future training and RDT&E activities, while enhancing training resources through investment in the range complex. The MIRC would enable the Navy to organize, train, equip, and maintain combat-ready forces to successfully fulfill their current and future global mission of winning wars, deterring aggression, and maintaining freedom of maritime movement. Due to its close proximity to forward-deployed forces in the Western Pacific, the MIRC would provide the most cost-effective and efficient alternative for supporting those forces. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Environmental and/or social stressors resulting from operations within MIRC would include vessel movement disturbance and vessel collisions; aircraft noise, including sonic booms; explosion of towed mine warfare devices and underwater detonations, explosion of high-explosive ordnance, disturbances caused by the use of non-explosive munitions; and detritus from expended material. The use of explosive munitions would release toxins into aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Underwater explosions and the use of sonar could affect the directional abilities of marine mammals, and a number of the animals would be injured or killed due to collisions with vessels. Explosives and ship movements would also place other marine organisms at risk, including coral reefs. Restrictions on airspace and Western Pacific operating areas would prevent the use of these areas by other transportation interests during operations, though such operations would invariably be of short duration. LEGAL MANDATES: Executive Order 12114. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0015D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100204, Volume 1--952 pages, Volume 2--873 pages, Volume 3: Appendices--1,170 pages, May 27, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Defense Programs KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Islands KW - Marine Mammals KW - Marine Surveys KW - Marine Systems KW - Military Operations (Joint) KW - Military Operations (Navy) KW - Munitions KW - Ships KW - Sonic Booms KW - Submarines KW - Andersen Air Force Base KW - Guam KW - Mariana Islands KW - Micronesia KW - Pacific Ocean KW - Palau KW - Executive Order 12114, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754907188?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. [Part 2 of 9] T2 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. AN - 756827469; 14352-100201_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The incremental development, implementation, and operation of high speed rail passenger service in the 450-mile travel corridor from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina, to Charlotte, North Carolina are proposed. Corridor development for the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project began in the early 1990s and a tiered approach was adopted for the environmental analysis because of the length of the corridor. The original SEHSR Tier I EIS (2002) covered the entire Washington, D.C. to Charlotte corridor at a program level, establishing the overall project purpose and need, along with the preferred corridor. This Tier II EIS includes detailed environmental analysis appropriate to the proposed actions planned within the 162-mile preferred corridor between Richmond and Raleigh. The project corridor is divided into 26 sections and three alternatives in each section are evaluated. Each rail alternative includes an associated set of highway improvements. The maximum authorized speed (MAS) for trains would be 110 miles per hour (mph) using fossil fueled locomotion. In those areas where it is not possible to fully straighten curves to sustain these speeds, the desired minimum curve speed would be 80 mph. The proposed rail improvements fall into three general categories within the overall project corridor: Richmond to Centralia, Virginia (approximately 11 miles) would be double track, mixed use (freight and passenger) initially at conventional speeds (79 mph); Centralia to Collier, Virginia (approximately 18 miles) would involve new track, 30 feet to the east of the existing main line track at MAS 90 mph; Collier to Raleigh, North Carolina (approximately 133 miles) would be new single track, with 5 mile long sidings every 10 miles and MAS of 110 mph. For safety and long term operability, the rail design for the project is fully grade separated, which means that all roads crossing the railroad would have either a bridge or underpass. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would divert trips from air and highway within the travel corridor, provide a more balanced use of the corridors transportation infrastructure, increase the safety and effectiveness of the transportation system, reduce emissions per passenger mile traveled, and serve both long-distance business and leisure travelers between and beyond Virginia and North Carolina. Total economic and fiscal impact would be $15.3 billion in 2008 dollars. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the proposed project corridor would impact from 36,079 feet up to 49,455 feet of streams and from 23.7 acres up to 36.8 acres of wetlands. All build alternatives would cross four designated Virginia Scenic Rivers (James River, Nottoway River, Appomattox River, and Meherrin River) and the Tar River in North Carolina via bridge spans. Twenty-four historic resources within the SEHSR corridor that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected by one or more of the project alternatives. In addition to underground storage tanks, dry cleaner sites, hazardous waste disposal sites, and similar hazardous sites, there is one Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facility site, and one polychlorinated biphenyl site within the project area that would be impacted by all three project alternatives. LEGAL MANDATES: Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 02-0060D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 02-0440F, Volume 26, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100201, Draft EIS--653 pages, Appendices--567 pages, Map Book--153 maps, May 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Virginia KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Project Authorization KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827469?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. [Part 1 of 9] T2 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. AN - 756827328; 14352-100201_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The incremental development, implementation, and operation of high speed rail passenger service in the 450-mile travel corridor from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina, to Charlotte, North Carolina are proposed. Corridor development for the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project began in the early 1990s and a tiered approach was adopted for the environmental analysis because of the length of the corridor. The original SEHSR Tier I EIS (2002) covered the entire Washington, D.C. to Charlotte corridor at a program level, establishing the overall project purpose and need, along with the preferred corridor. This Tier II EIS includes detailed environmental analysis appropriate to the proposed actions planned within the 162-mile preferred corridor between Richmond and Raleigh. The project corridor is divided into 26 sections and three alternatives in each section are evaluated. Each rail alternative includes an associated set of highway improvements. The maximum authorized speed (MAS) for trains would be 110 miles per hour (mph) using fossil fueled locomotion. In those areas where it is not possible to fully straighten curves to sustain these speeds, the desired minimum curve speed would be 80 mph. The proposed rail improvements fall into three general categories within the overall project corridor: Richmond to Centralia, Virginia (approximately 11 miles) would be double track, mixed use (freight and passenger) initially at conventional speeds (79 mph); Centralia to Collier, Virginia (approximately 18 miles) would involve new track, 30 feet to the east of the existing main line track at MAS 90 mph; Collier to Raleigh, North Carolina (approximately 133 miles) would be new single track, with 5 mile long sidings every 10 miles and MAS of 110 mph. For safety and long term operability, the rail design for the project is fully grade separated, which means that all roads crossing the railroad would have either a bridge or underpass. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would divert trips from air and highway within the travel corridor, provide a more balanced use of the corridors transportation infrastructure, increase the safety and effectiveness of the transportation system, reduce emissions per passenger mile traveled, and serve both long-distance business and leisure travelers between and beyond Virginia and North Carolina. Total economic and fiscal impact would be $15.3 billion in 2008 dollars. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the proposed project corridor would impact from 36,079 feet up to 49,455 feet of streams and from 23.7 acres up to 36.8 acres of wetlands. All build alternatives would cross four designated Virginia Scenic Rivers (James River, Nottoway River, Appomattox River, and Meherrin River) and the Tar River in North Carolina via bridge spans. Twenty-four historic resources within the SEHSR corridor that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected by one or more of the project alternatives. In addition to underground storage tanks, dry cleaner sites, hazardous waste disposal sites, and similar hazardous sites, there is one Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facility site, and one polychlorinated biphenyl site within the project area that would be impacted by all three project alternatives. LEGAL MANDATES: Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 02-0060D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 02-0440F, Volume 26, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100201, Draft EIS--653 pages, Appendices--567 pages, Map Book--153 maps, May 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Virginia KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Project Authorization KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827328?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. [Part 3 of 9] T2 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. AN - 756827323; 14352-100201_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The incremental development, implementation, and operation of high speed rail passenger service in the 450-mile travel corridor from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina, to Charlotte, North Carolina are proposed. Corridor development for the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project began in the early 1990s and a tiered approach was adopted for the environmental analysis because of the length of the corridor. The original SEHSR Tier I EIS (2002) covered the entire Washington, D.C. to Charlotte corridor at a program level, establishing the overall project purpose and need, along with the preferred corridor. This Tier II EIS includes detailed environmental analysis appropriate to the proposed actions planned within the 162-mile preferred corridor between Richmond and Raleigh. The project corridor is divided into 26 sections and three alternatives in each section are evaluated. Each rail alternative includes an associated set of highway improvements. The maximum authorized speed (MAS) for trains would be 110 miles per hour (mph) using fossil fueled locomotion. In those areas where it is not possible to fully straighten curves to sustain these speeds, the desired minimum curve speed would be 80 mph. The proposed rail improvements fall into three general categories within the overall project corridor: Richmond to Centralia, Virginia (approximately 11 miles) would be double track, mixed use (freight and passenger) initially at conventional speeds (79 mph); Centralia to Collier, Virginia (approximately 18 miles) would involve new track, 30 feet to the east of the existing main line track at MAS 90 mph; Collier to Raleigh, North Carolina (approximately 133 miles) would be new single track, with 5 mile long sidings every 10 miles and MAS of 110 mph. For safety and long term operability, the rail design for the project is fully grade separated, which means that all roads crossing the railroad would have either a bridge or underpass. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would divert trips from air and highway within the travel corridor, provide a more balanced use of the corridors transportation infrastructure, increase the safety and effectiveness of the transportation system, reduce emissions per passenger mile traveled, and serve both long-distance business and leisure travelers between and beyond Virginia and North Carolina. Total economic and fiscal impact would be $15.3 billion in 2008 dollars. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the proposed project corridor would impact from 36,079 feet up to 49,455 feet of streams and from 23.7 acres up to 36.8 acres of wetlands. All build alternatives would cross four designated Virginia Scenic Rivers (James River, Nottoway River, Appomattox River, and Meherrin River) and the Tar River in North Carolina via bridge spans. Twenty-four historic resources within the SEHSR corridor that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected by one or more of the project alternatives. In addition to underground storage tanks, dry cleaner sites, hazardous waste disposal sites, and similar hazardous sites, there is one Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facility site, and one polychlorinated biphenyl site within the project area that would be impacted by all three project alternatives. LEGAL MANDATES: Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 02-0060D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 02-0440F, Volume 26, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100201, Draft EIS--653 pages, Appendices--567 pages, Map Book--153 maps, May 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Virginia KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Project Authorization KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827323?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. [Part 9 of 9] T2 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. AN - 756827321; 14352-100201_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The incremental development, implementation, and operation of high speed rail passenger service in the 450-mile travel corridor from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina, to Charlotte, North Carolina are proposed. Corridor development for the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project began in the early 1990s and a tiered approach was adopted for the environmental analysis because of the length of the corridor. The original SEHSR Tier I EIS (2002) covered the entire Washington, D.C. to Charlotte corridor at a program level, establishing the overall project purpose and need, along with the preferred corridor. This Tier II EIS includes detailed environmental analysis appropriate to the proposed actions planned within the 162-mile preferred corridor between Richmond and Raleigh. The project corridor is divided into 26 sections and three alternatives in each section are evaluated. Each rail alternative includes an associated set of highway improvements. The maximum authorized speed (MAS) for trains would be 110 miles per hour (mph) using fossil fueled locomotion. In those areas where it is not possible to fully straighten curves to sustain these speeds, the desired minimum curve speed would be 80 mph. The proposed rail improvements fall into three general categories within the overall project corridor: Richmond to Centralia, Virginia (approximately 11 miles) would be double track, mixed use (freight and passenger) initially at conventional speeds (79 mph); Centralia to Collier, Virginia (approximately 18 miles) would involve new track, 30 feet to the east of the existing main line track at MAS 90 mph; Collier to Raleigh, North Carolina (approximately 133 miles) would be new single track, with 5 mile long sidings every 10 miles and MAS of 110 mph. For safety and long term operability, the rail design for the project is fully grade separated, which means that all roads crossing the railroad would have either a bridge or underpass. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would divert trips from air and highway within the travel corridor, provide a more balanced use of the corridors transportation infrastructure, increase the safety and effectiveness of the transportation system, reduce emissions per passenger mile traveled, and serve both long-distance business and leisure travelers between and beyond Virginia and North Carolina. Total economic and fiscal impact would be $15.3 billion in 2008 dollars. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the proposed project corridor would impact from 36,079 feet up to 49,455 feet of streams and from 23.7 acres up to 36.8 acres of wetlands. All build alternatives would cross four designated Virginia Scenic Rivers (James River, Nottoway River, Appomattox River, and Meherrin River) and the Tar River in North Carolina via bridge spans. Twenty-four historic resources within the SEHSR corridor that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected by one or more of the project alternatives. In addition to underground storage tanks, dry cleaner sites, hazardous waste disposal sites, and similar hazardous sites, there is one Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facility site, and one polychlorinated biphenyl site within the project area that would be impacted by all three project alternatives. LEGAL MANDATES: Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 02-0060D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 02-0440F, Volume 26, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100201, Draft EIS--653 pages, Appendices--567 pages, Map Book--153 maps, May 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Virginia KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Project Authorization KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827321?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. [Part 7 of 9] T2 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. AN - 756827319; 14352-100201_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The incremental development, implementation, and operation of high speed rail passenger service in the 450-mile travel corridor from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina, to Charlotte, North Carolina are proposed. Corridor development for the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project began in the early 1990s and a tiered approach was adopted for the environmental analysis because of the length of the corridor. The original SEHSR Tier I EIS (2002) covered the entire Washington, D.C. to Charlotte corridor at a program level, establishing the overall project purpose and need, along with the preferred corridor. This Tier II EIS includes detailed environmental analysis appropriate to the proposed actions planned within the 162-mile preferred corridor between Richmond and Raleigh. The project corridor is divided into 26 sections and three alternatives in each section are evaluated. Each rail alternative includes an associated set of highway improvements. The maximum authorized speed (MAS) for trains would be 110 miles per hour (mph) using fossil fueled locomotion. In those areas where it is not possible to fully straighten curves to sustain these speeds, the desired minimum curve speed would be 80 mph. The proposed rail improvements fall into three general categories within the overall project corridor: Richmond to Centralia, Virginia (approximately 11 miles) would be double track, mixed use (freight and passenger) initially at conventional speeds (79 mph); Centralia to Collier, Virginia (approximately 18 miles) would involve new track, 30 feet to the east of the existing main line track at MAS 90 mph; Collier to Raleigh, North Carolina (approximately 133 miles) would be new single track, with 5 mile long sidings every 10 miles and MAS of 110 mph. For safety and long term operability, the rail design for the project is fully grade separated, which means that all roads crossing the railroad would have either a bridge or underpass. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would divert trips from air and highway within the travel corridor, provide a more balanced use of the corridors transportation infrastructure, increase the safety and effectiveness of the transportation system, reduce emissions per passenger mile traveled, and serve both long-distance business and leisure travelers between and beyond Virginia and North Carolina. Total economic and fiscal impact would be $15.3 billion in 2008 dollars. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the proposed project corridor would impact from 36,079 feet up to 49,455 feet of streams and from 23.7 acres up to 36.8 acres of wetlands. All build alternatives would cross four designated Virginia Scenic Rivers (James River, Nottoway River, Appomattox River, and Meherrin River) and the Tar River in North Carolina via bridge spans. Twenty-four historic resources within the SEHSR corridor that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected by one or more of the project alternatives. In addition to underground storage tanks, dry cleaner sites, hazardous waste disposal sites, and similar hazardous sites, there is one Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facility site, and one polychlorinated biphenyl site within the project area that would be impacted by all three project alternatives. LEGAL MANDATES: Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 02-0060D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 02-0440F, Volume 26, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100201, Draft EIS--653 pages, Appendices--567 pages, Map Book--153 maps, May 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Virginia KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Project Authorization KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827319?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. [Part 6 of 9] T2 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. AN - 756827312; 14352-100201_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The incremental development, implementation, and operation of high speed rail passenger service in the 450-mile travel corridor from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina, to Charlotte, North Carolina are proposed. Corridor development for the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project began in the early 1990s and a tiered approach was adopted for the environmental analysis because of the length of the corridor. The original SEHSR Tier I EIS (2002) covered the entire Washington, D.C. to Charlotte corridor at a program level, establishing the overall project purpose and need, along with the preferred corridor. This Tier II EIS includes detailed environmental analysis appropriate to the proposed actions planned within the 162-mile preferred corridor between Richmond and Raleigh. The project corridor is divided into 26 sections and three alternatives in each section are evaluated. Each rail alternative includes an associated set of highway improvements. The maximum authorized speed (MAS) for trains would be 110 miles per hour (mph) using fossil fueled locomotion. In those areas where it is not possible to fully straighten curves to sustain these speeds, the desired minimum curve speed would be 80 mph. The proposed rail improvements fall into three general categories within the overall project corridor: Richmond to Centralia, Virginia (approximately 11 miles) would be double track, mixed use (freight and passenger) initially at conventional speeds (79 mph); Centralia to Collier, Virginia (approximately 18 miles) would involve new track, 30 feet to the east of the existing main line track at MAS 90 mph; Collier to Raleigh, North Carolina (approximately 133 miles) would be new single track, with 5 mile long sidings every 10 miles and MAS of 110 mph. For safety and long term operability, the rail design for the project is fully grade separated, which means that all roads crossing the railroad would have either a bridge or underpass. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would divert trips from air and highway within the travel corridor, provide a more balanced use of the corridors transportation infrastructure, increase the safety and effectiveness of the transportation system, reduce emissions per passenger mile traveled, and serve both long-distance business and leisure travelers between and beyond Virginia and North Carolina. Total economic and fiscal impact would be $15.3 billion in 2008 dollars. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the proposed project corridor would impact from 36,079 feet up to 49,455 feet of streams and from 23.7 acres up to 36.8 acres of wetlands. All build alternatives would cross four designated Virginia Scenic Rivers (James River, Nottoway River, Appomattox River, and Meherrin River) and the Tar River in North Carolina via bridge spans. Twenty-four historic resources within the SEHSR corridor that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected by one or more of the project alternatives. In addition to underground storage tanks, dry cleaner sites, hazardous waste disposal sites, and similar hazardous sites, there is one Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facility site, and one polychlorinated biphenyl site within the project area that would be impacted by all three project alternatives. LEGAL MANDATES: Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 02-0060D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 02-0440F, Volume 26, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100201, Draft EIS--653 pages, Appendices--567 pages, Map Book--153 maps, May 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Virginia KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Project Authorization KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827312?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. [Part 5 of 9] T2 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. AN - 756827304; 14352-100201_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The incremental development, implementation, and operation of high speed rail passenger service in the 450-mile travel corridor from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina, to Charlotte, North Carolina are proposed. Corridor development for the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project began in the early 1990s and a tiered approach was adopted for the environmental analysis because of the length of the corridor. The original SEHSR Tier I EIS (2002) covered the entire Washington, D.C. to Charlotte corridor at a program level, establishing the overall project purpose and need, along with the preferred corridor. This Tier II EIS includes detailed environmental analysis appropriate to the proposed actions planned within the 162-mile preferred corridor between Richmond and Raleigh. The project corridor is divided into 26 sections and three alternatives in each section are evaluated. Each rail alternative includes an associated set of highway improvements. The maximum authorized speed (MAS) for trains would be 110 miles per hour (mph) using fossil fueled locomotion. In those areas where it is not possible to fully straighten curves to sustain these speeds, the desired minimum curve speed would be 80 mph. The proposed rail improvements fall into three general categories within the overall project corridor: Richmond to Centralia, Virginia (approximately 11 miles) would be double track, mixed use (freight and passenger) initially at conventional speeds (79 mph); Centralia to Collier, Virginia (approximately 18 miles) would involve new track, 30 feet to the east of the existing main line track at MAS 90 mph; Collier to Raleigh, North Carolina (approximately 133 miles) would be new single track, with 5 mile long sidings every 10 miles and MAS of 110 mph. For safety and long term operability, the rail design for the project is fully grade separated, which means that all roads crossing the railroad would have either a bridge or underpass. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would divert trips from air and highway within the travel corridor, provide a more balanced use of the corridors transportation infrastructure, increase the safety and effectiveness of the transportation system, reduce emissions per passenger mile traveled, and serve both long-distance business and leisure travelers between and beyond Virginia and North Carolina. Total economic and fiscal impact would be $15.3 billion in 2008 dollars. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the proposed project corridor would impact from 36,079 feet up to 49,455 feet of streams and from 23.7 acres up to 36.8 acres of wetlands. All build alternatives would cross four designated Virginia Scenic Rivers (James River, Nottoway River, Appomattox River, and Meherrin River) and the Tar River in North Carolina via bridge spans. Twenty-four historic resources within the SEHSR corridor that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected by one or more of the project alternatives. In addition to underground storage tanks, dry cleaner sites, hazardous waste disposal sites, and similar hazardous sites, there is one Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facility site, and one polychlorinated biphenyl site within the project area that would be impacted by all three project alternatives. LEGAL MANDATES: Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 02-0060D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 02-0440F, Volume 26, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100201, Draft EIS--653 pages, Appendices--567 pages, Map Book--153 maps, May 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Virginia KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Project Authorization KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827304?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. [Part 8 of 9] T2 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. AN - 756827134; 14352-100201_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The incremental development, implementation, and operation of high speed rail passenger service in the 450-mile travel corridor from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina, to Charlotte, North Carolina are proposed. Corridor development for the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project began in the early 1990s and a tiered approach was adopted for the environmental analysis because of the length of the corridor. The original SEHSR Tier I EIS (2002) covered the entire Washington, D.C. to Charlotte corridor at a program level, establishing the overall project purpose and need, along with the preferred corridor. This Tier II EIS includes detailed environmental analysis appropriate to the proposed actions planned within the 162-mile preferred corridor between Richmond and Raleigh. The project corridor is divided into 26 sections and three alternatives in each section are evaluated. Each rail alternative includes an associated set of highway improvements. The maximum authorized speed (MAS) for trains would be 110 miles per hour (mph) using fossil fueled locomotion. In those areas where it is not possible to fully straighten curves to sustain these speeds, the desired minimum curve speed would be 80 mph. The proposed rail improvements fall into three general categories within the overall project corridor: Richmond to Centralia, Virginia (approximately 11 miles) would be double track, mixed use (freight and passenger) initially at conventional speeds (79 mph); Centralia to Collier, Virginia (approximately 18 miles) would involve new track, 30 feet to the east of the existing main line track at MAS 90 mph; Collier to Raleigh, North Carolina (approximately 133 miles) would be new single track, with 5 mile long sidings every 10 miles and MAS of 110 mph. For safety and long term operability, the rail design for the project is fully grade separated, which means that all roads crossing the railroad would have either a bridge or underpass. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would divert trips from air and highway within the travel corridor, provide a more balanced use of the corridors transportation infrastructure, increase the safety and effectiveness of the transportation system, reduce emissions per passenger mile traveled, and serve both long-distance business and leisure travelers between and beyond Virginia and North Carolina. Total economic and fiscal impact would be $15.3 billion in 2008 dollars. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the proposed project corridor would impact from 36,079 feet up to 49,455 feet of streams and from 23.7 acres up to 36.8 acres of wetlands. All build alternatives would cross four designated Virginia Scenic Rivers (James River, Nottoway River, Appomattox River, and Meherrin River) and the Tar River in North Carolina via bridge spans. Twenty-four historic resources within the SEHSR corridor that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected by one or more of the project alternatives. In addition to underground storage tanks, dry cleaner sites, hazardous waste disposal sites, and similar hazardous sites, there is one Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facility site, and one polychlorinated biphenyl site within the project area that would be impacted by all three project alternatives. LEGAL MANDATES: Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 02-0060D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 02-0440F, Volume 26, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100201, Draft EIS--653 pages, Appendices--567 pages, Map Book--153 maps, May 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Virginia KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Project Authorization KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827134?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. [Part 4 of 9] T2 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. AN - 756827126; 14352-100201_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The incremental development, implementation, and operation of high speed rail passenger service in the 450-mile travel corridor from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina, to Charlotte, North Carolina are proposed. Corridor development for the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project began in the early 1990s and a tiered approach was adopted for the environmental analysis because of the length of the corridor. The original SEHSR Tier I EIS (2002) covered the entire Washington, D.C. to Charlotte corridor at a program level, establishing the overall project purpose and need, along with the preferred corridor. This Tier II EIS includes detailed environmental analysis appropriate to the proposed actions planned within the 162-mile preferred corridor between Richmond and Raleigh. The project corridor is divided into 26 sections and three alternatives in each section are evaluated. Each rail alternative includes an associated set of highway improvements. The maximum authorized speed (MAS) for trains would be 110 miles per hour (mph) using fossil fueled locomotion. In those areas where it is not possible to fully straighten curves to sustain these speeds, the desired minimum curve speed would be 80 mph. The proposed rail improvements fall into three general categories within the overall project corridor: Richmond to Centralia, Virginia (approximately 11 miles) would be double track, mixed use (freight and passenger) initially at conventional speeds (79 mph); Centralia to Collier, Virginia (approximately 18 miles) would involve new track, 30 feet to the east of the existing main line track at MAS 90 mph; Collier to Raleigh, North Carolina (approximately 133 miles) would be new single track, with 5 mile long sidings every 10 miles and MAS of 110 mph. For safety and long term operability, the rail design for the project is fully grade separated, which means that all roads crossing the railroad would have either a bridge or underpass. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would divert trips from air and highway within the travel corridor, provide a more balanced use of the corridors transportation infrastructure, increase the safety and effectiveness of the transportation system, reduce emissions per passenger mile traveled, and serve both long-distance business and leisure travelers between and beyond Virginia and North Carolina. Total economic and fiscal impact would be $15.3 billion in 2008 dollars. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the proposed project corridor would impact from 36,079 feet up to 49,455 feet of streams and from 23.7 acres up to 36.8 acres of wetlands. All build alternatives would cross four designated Virginia Scenic Rivers (James River, Nottoway River, Appomattox River, and Meherrin River) and the Tar River in North Carolina via bridge spans. Twenty-four historic resources within the SEHSR corridor that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected by one or more of the project alternatives. In addition to underground storage tanks, dry cleaner sites, hazardous waste disposal sites, and similar hazardous sites, there is one Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facility site, and one polychlorinated biphenyl site within the project area that would be impacted by all three project alternatives. LEGAL MANDATES: Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 02-0060D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 02-0440F, Volume 26, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100201, Draft EIS--653 pages, Appendices--567 pages, Map Book--153 maps, May 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Virginia KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Project Authorization KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827126?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST HIGH SPEED RAIL RICHMOND-RALEIGH PROJECT, NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA. AN - 15233856; 14352 AB - PURPOSE: The incremental development, implementation, and operation of high speed rail passenger service in the 450-mile travel corridor from Washington, D.C. through Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina, to Charlotte, North Carolina are proposed. Corridor development for the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) project began in the early 1990s and a tiered approach was adopted for the environmental analysis because of the length of the corridor. The original SEHSR Tier I EIS (2002) covered the entire Washington, D.C. to Charlotte corridor at a program level, establishing the overall project purpose and need, along with the preferred corridor. This Tier II EIS includes detailed environmental analysis appropriate to the proposed actions planned within the 162-mile preferred corridor between Richmond and Raleigh. The project corridor is divided into 26 sections and three alternatives in each section are evaluated. Each rail alternative includes an associated set of highway improvements. The maximum authorized speed (MAS) for trains would be 110 miles per hour (mph) using fossil fueled locomotion. In those areas where it is not possible to fully straighten curves to sustain these speeds, the desired minimum curve speed would be 80 mph. The proposed rail improvements fall into three general categories within the overall project corridor: Richmond to Centralia, Virginia (approximately 11 miles) would be double track, mixed use (freight and passenger) initially at conventional speeds (79 mph); Centralia to Collier, Virginia (approximately 18 miles) would involve new track, 30 feet to the east of the existing main line track at MAS 90 mph; Collier to Raleigh, North Carolina (approximately 133 miles) would be new single track, with 5 mile long sidings every 10 miles and MAS of 110 mph. For safety and long term operability, the rail design for the project is fully grade separated, which means that all roads crossing the railroad would have either a bridge or underpass. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would divert trips from air and highway within the travel corridor, provide a more balanced use of the corridors transportation infrastructure, increase the safety and effectiveness of the transportation system, reduce emissions per passenger mile traveled, and serve both long-distance business and leisure travelers between and beyond Virginia and North Carolina. Total economic and fiscal impact would be $15.3 billion in 2008 dollars. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the proposed project corridor would impact from 36,079 feet up to 49,455 feet of streams and from 23.7 acres up to 36.8 acres of wetlands. All build alternatives would cross four designated Virginia Scenic Rivers (James River, Nottoway River, Appomattox River, and Meherrin River) and the Tar River in North Carolina via bridge spans. Twenty-four historic resources within the SEHSR corridor that are eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places would be adversely affected by one or more of the project alternatives. In addition to underground storage tanks, dry cleaner sites, hazardous waste disposal sites, and similar hazardous sites, there is one Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action facility site, and one polychlorinated biphenyl site within the project area that would be impacted by all three project alternatives. LEGAL MANDATES: Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the Tier I draft and final EISs, see 02-0060D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 02-0440F, Volume 26, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100201, Draft EIS--653 pages, Appendices--567 pages, Map Book--153 maps, May 25, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wild and Scenic Rivers KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Virginia KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Project Authorization KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Project Authorization KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/15233856?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+HIGH+SPEED+RAIL+RICHMOND-RALEIGH+PROJECT%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA+AND+VIRGINIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-21 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 13 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873132083; 14343-2_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132083?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 12 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873132081; 14343-2_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132081?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 11 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873132078; 14343-2_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132078?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 10 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873132069; 14343-2_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132069?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 9 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873132068; 14343-2_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132068?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 8 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873132064; 14343-2_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132064?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 7 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873132061; 14343-2_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132061?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 1 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873132058; 14343-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132058?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 30 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873132052; 14337-6_0030 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132052?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 18 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130693; 14337-6_0018 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130693?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 17 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130677; 14337-6_0017 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130677?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 2 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130647; 14343-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130647?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 5 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130583; 14337-6_0005 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130583?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 4 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130570; 14337-6_0004 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130570?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 3 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130560; 14337-6_0003 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130560?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 2 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130549; 14337-6_0002 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130549?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 1 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130542; 14337-6_0001 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130542?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 6 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130497; 14343-2_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130497?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 28 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130489; 14337-6_0028 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130489?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 5 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130480; 14343-2_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130480?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 4 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130471; 14343-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130471?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 3 of 13] T2 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130461; 14343-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130461?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 16 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130290; 14337-6_0016 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130290?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 15 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130264; 14337-6_0015 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130264?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 14 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873130216; 14337-6_0014 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130216?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 25 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128859; 14337-6_0025 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128859?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 24 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128849; 14337-6_0024 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128849?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 29 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128693; 14337-6_0029 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128693?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 13 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128678; 14337-6_0013 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128678?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 12 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128665; 14337-6_0012 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128665?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 11 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128653; 14337-6_0011 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128653?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 10 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128644; 14337-6_0010 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128644?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 9 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128635; 14337-6_0009 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128635?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-07-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT+SECTION+4%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WEAPONS+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 8 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128617; 14337-6_0008 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128617?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 7 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128605; 14337-6_0007 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128605?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 6 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873128591; 14337-6_0006 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128591?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 20 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127851; 14337-6_0020 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127851?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 19 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127841; 14337-6_0019 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127841?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 23 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127691; 14337-6_0023 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127691?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. [Part 21 of 30] T2 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 873127685; 14337-6_0021 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127685?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. [Part 1 of 6] T2 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. AN - 756827475; 14342-100191_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of transit-related improvements to develop transportation access and infrastructure at both the Northern and Southern areas of the Hatcher Pass Recreational Area located 55 miles north of Anchorage, Alaska is proposed. Hatcher Pass is a popular year-round recreational area in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough (MSB) that has experienced a steady annual increase in visitation numbers over the last decade and an increase of 34 percent between 2008 and 2009. Current recreational use of the areas includes Nordic and Alpine skiing, snowboarding, all-terrain vehicle and snowmobile use, mountain biking, hiking, mountain racing, sledding, hunting, horseback riding, berry picking, and paragliding. Both Hatcher Pass Recreational Area Access, Trails, and Transit Facilities project (Hatcher Pass Transit Project) areas fall within the Government Peak subunit of Hatcher Pass where the MSB owns and manages 3,000 acres of land. The remainder is owned by Alaska Department of Natural Resources and is leased and managed by the MSB. The proposed action would include construction of the following improvements: paved access roads (upgrade/realignment of existing gravel road in the Northern Area; new access road in the Southern Area); paved parking lots with lighting (upgrade of existing gravel parking lot in Northern Area to accommodate 413 vehicles and two buses; new parking lot in Southern Area to accommodate 210 vehicles and six buses); enclosed 20- to 30-passenger transit facilities with restrooms includes heating and lighting; utility extensions (i.e., telephone or fiber-optic cable and electrical lines); additional proposed improvements in the Southern Area including a paved non-motorized separated pathway that would parallel the new access road. This draft EIS analyzes the proposed project and a No Action Alternative. It also includes secondary analysis of a separately funded project to develop Nordic and Alpine ski areas in conjunction with the proposed construction of roads, parking lots, and transit facility improvements. However, the proposed transportation improvements are needed whether the MSBs ski area improvements are constructed or not, and thus they have independent utility as defined by the Federal Transit Administrations National Environmental Policy Act regulations. Construction is expected to start in the spring of 2011, with operation under way in winter 2011. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of transportation access and transit-related infrastructure in both the Northern and Southern Areas would help support existing and future year-round recreational use. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Cumulative impacts would include minor increases in air emissions, habitat loss which may decrease wildlife in the area, loss of wetlands, and possible minimal effect on water quality, and visual resources. Implementation would require acquisition of 13.6 acres of privately owned property for construction of the proposed paved access road and non-motorized, paved, separated pathway. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100191, Draft EIS--259 pages, Appendices A through K--543 pages, Appendices L through S--339 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Land Use KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Fish KW - Parking KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Roads KW - Ski Areas KW - Trails KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Executive Order 11990, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827475?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANSBAY TERMINAL/CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION/REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 4] T2 - TRANSBAY TERMINAL/CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION/REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827434; 14344-100193_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new multimodal terminal on the site of the present Transbay Terminal and other transportation improvements and associated developments in the city of San Francisco and San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties, California are proposed. In addition to the terminal, the project would include the extension of Caltrain and California High Speed Rail underground from Caltrain's current terminus at Fourth and King streets to a new underground terminus beneath the new terminal and establishment of a redevelopment area plan with related development projects, including transit-oriented development on publicly owned land in the vicinity of the new terminal. The existing Transbay Terminal, which was built in 1939, does not meet current seismic safety or space utilization standards. The Federal Railroad Administration is adopting the portion of the March 2004 final EIS that covers Phase 1 of the Transbay Program with the intention of providing up to $400 million in funding. The 2004 final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative, two alternatives with respect to the terminal, two alternatives with respect to the Caltrain extension, and two alternatives with respect to the Transbay redevelopment plan. Under the full-build alternative, the Transbay redevelopment plan alternatives would result in the construction of 7.6 million square feet of residential, office, retail, and hotel space, including 5.6 million square feet of residential development within 4,700 units, 1.2 million square feet of office space, 475,000 square feet of hotel development, and 355,000 square feet of retail space. The Phase 1 cost is estimated at $1.59 billion in year of expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The modernization of the terminal facility would provide for a more adequate facility that would meet seismic standards and would also provide the opportunity to revitalize the surrounding area with a mix of land uses that include both market-rate and affordable housing and to extend Caltrain service from its current terminus outside the downtown area into the San Francisco employment core. Increases in Caltrain and other transit ridership, reductions in non-transit vehicle use, and improvements in regional air quality would be expected. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Numerous residences and businesses would be displaced. Demolition of the existing terminal would result in the loss of a structure eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, as well as the loss of the terminal loop ramp, a contributing element to the historic Bay Bridge. Traffic levels would increase significantly in the vicinity of the project, and project facilities would displace parking spaces in the area. Wind velocities would exceed city standards in portions of the redevelopment area. Vibration impacts would occur in the vicinity of four buildings due to operation of the Caltrain extension. LEGAL MANDATES: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 03-0088D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 04-0441F, Volume 28, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100193, Final EIS Reevaluation--412 pages, March 2004 Final EIS Volume 1--622 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Buildings KW - Commercial Zones KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hotels KW - Housing KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Transportation KW - Underground Structures KW - Urban Development KW - Urban Renewal KW - California KW - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Funding KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827434?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANSBAY+TERMINAL%2FCALTRAIN+DOWNTOWN+EXTENSION%2FREDEVELOPMENT+PROJECT+IN+THE+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+SAN+MATEO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=TRANSBAY+TERMINAL%2FCALTRAIN+DOWNTOWN+EXTENSION%2FREDEVELOPMENT+PROJECT+IN+THE+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+SAN+MATEO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. [Part 2 of 6] T2 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. AN - 756827358; 14342-100191_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of transit-related improvements to develop transportation access and infrastructure at both the Northern and Southern areas of the Hatcher Pass Recreational Area located 55 miles north of Anchorage, Alaska is proposed. Hatcher Pass is a popular year-round recreational area in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough (MSB) that has experienced a steady annual increase in visitation numbers over the last decade and an increase of 34 percent between 2008 and 2009. Current recreational use of the areas includes Nordic and Alpine skiing, snowboarding, all-terrain vehicle and snowmobile use, mountain biking, hiking, mountain racing, sledding, hunting, horseback riding, berry picking, and paragliding. Both Hatcher Pass Recreational Area Access, Trails, and Transit Facilities project (Hatcher Pass Transit Project) areas fall within the Government Peak subunit of Hatcher Pass where the MSB owns and manages 3,000 acres of land. The remainder is owned by Alaska Department of Natural Resources and is leased and managed by the MSB. The proposed action would include construction of the following improvements: paved access roads (upgrade/realignment of existing gravel road in the Northern Area; new access road in the Southern Area); paved parking lots with lighting (upgrade of existing gravel parking lot in Northern Area to accommodate 413 vehicles and two buses; new parking lot in Southern Area to accommodate 210 vehicles and six buses); enclosed 20- to 30-passenger transit facilities with restrooms includes heating and lighting; utility extensions (i.e., telephone or fiber-optic cable and electrical lines); additional proposed improvements in the Southern Area including a paved non-motorized separated pathway that would parallel the new access road. This draft EIS analyzes the proposed project and a No Action Alternative. It also includes secondary analysis of a separately funded project to develop Nordic and Alpine ski areas in conjunction with the proposed construction of roads, parking lots, and transit facility improvements. However, the proposed transportation improvements are needed whether the MSBs ski area improvements are constructed or not, and thus they have independent utility as defined by the Federal Transit Administrations National Environmental Policy Act regulations. Construction is expected to start in the spring of 2011, with operation under way in winter 2011. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of transportation access and transit-related infrastructure in both the Northern and Southern Areas would help support existing and future year-round recreational use. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Cumulative impacts would include minor increases in air emissions, habitat loss which may decrease wildlife in the area, loss of wetlands, and possible minimal effect on water quality, and visual resources. Implementation would require acquisition of 13.6 acres of privately owned property for construction of the proposed paved access road and non-motorized, paved, separated pathway. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100191, Draft EIS--259 pages, Appendices A through K--543 pages, Appendices L through S--339 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Land Use KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Fish KW - Parking KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Roads KW - Ski Areas KW - Trails KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Executive Order 11990, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827358?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. [Part 4 of 6] T2 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. AN - 756827311; 14342-100191_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of transit-related improvements to develop transportation access and infrastructure at both the Northern and Southern areas of the Hatcher Pass Recreational Area located 55 miles north of Anchorage, Alaska is proposed. Hatcher Pass is a popular year-round recreational area in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough (MSB) that has experienced a steady annual increase in visitation numbers over the last decade and an increase of 34 percent between 2008 and 2009. Current recreational use of the areas includes Nordic and Alpine skiing, snowboarding, all-terrain vehicle and snowmobile use, mountain biking, hiking, mountain racing, sledding, hunting, horseback riding, berry picking, and paragliding. Both Hatcher Pass Recreational Area Access, Trails, and Transit Facilities project (Hatcher Pass Transit Project) areas fall within the Government Peak subunit of Hatcher Pass where the MSB owns and manages 3,000 acres of land. The remainder is owned by Alaska Department of Natural Resources and is leased and managed by the MSB. The proposed action would include construction of the following improvements: paved access roads (upgrade/realignment of existing gravel road in the Northern Area; new access road in the Southern Area); paved parking lots with lighting (upgrade of existing gravel parking lot in Northern Area to accommodate 413 vehicles and two buses; new parking lot in Southern Area to accommodate 210 vehicles and six buses); enclosed 20- to 30-passenger transit facilities with restrooms includes heating and lighting; utility extensions (i.e., telephone or fiber-optic cable and electrical lines); additional proposed improvements in the Southern Area including a paved non-motorized separated pathway that would parallel the new access road. This draft EIS analyzes the proposed project and a No Action Alternative. It also includes secondary analysis of a separately funded project to develop Nordic and Alpine ski areas in conjunction with the proposed construction of roads, parking lots, and transit facility improvements. However, the proposed transportation improvements are needed whether the MSBs ski area improvements are constructed or not, and thus they have independent utility as defined by the Federal Transit Administrations National Environmental Policy Act regulations. Construction is expected to start in the spring of 2011, with operation under way in winter 2011. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of transportation access and transit-related infrastructure in both the Northern and Southern Areas would help support existing and future year-round recreational use. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Cumulative impacts would include minor increases in air emissions, habitat loss which may decrease wildlife in the area, loss of wetlands, and possible minimal effect on water quality, and visual resources. Implementation would require acquisition of 13.6 acres of privately owned property for construction of the proposed paved access road and non-motorized, paved, separated pathway. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100191, Draft EIS--259 pages, Appendices A through K--543 pages, Appendices L through S--339 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Land Use KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Fish KW - Parking KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Roads KW - Ski Areas KW - Trails KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Executive Order 11990, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827311?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. [Part 3 of 6] T2 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. AN - 756827297; 14342-100191_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of transit-related improvements to develop transportation access and infrastructure at both the Northern and Southern areas of the Hatcher Pass Recreational Area located 55 miles north of Anchorage, Alaska is proposed. Hatcher Pass is a popular year-round recreational area in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough (MSB) that has experienced a steady annual increase in visitation numbers over the last decade and an increase of 34 percent between 2008 and 2009. Current recreational use of the areas includes Nordic and Alpine skiing, snowboarding, all-terrain vehicle and snowmobile use, mountain biking, hiking, mountain racing, sledding, hunting, horseback riding, berry picking, and paragliding. Both Hatcher Pass Recreational Area Access, Trails, and Transit Facilities project (Hatcher Pass Transit Project) areas fall within the Government Peak subunit of Hatcher Pass where the MSB owns and manages 3,000 acres of land. The remainder is owned by Alaska Department of Natural Resources and is leased and managed by the MSB. The proposed action would include construction of the following improvements: paved access roads (upgrade/realignment of existing gravel road in the Northern Area; new access road in the Southern Area); paved parking lots with lighting (upgrade of existing gravel parking lot in Northern Area to accommodate 413 vehicles and two buses; new parking lot in Southern Area to accommodate 210 vehicles and six buses); enclosed 20- to 30-passenger transit facilities with restrooms includes heating and lighting; utility extensions (i.e., telephone or fiber-optic cable and electrical lines); additional proposed improvements in the Southern Area including a paved non-motorized separated pathway that would parallel the new access road. This draft EIS analyzes the proposed project and a No Action Alternative. It also includes secondary analysis of a separately funded project to develop Nordic and Alpine ski areas in conjunction with the proposed construction of roads, parking lots, and transit facility improvements. However, the proposed transportation improvements are needed whether the MSBs ski area improvements are constructed or not, and thus they have independent utility as defined by the Federal Transit Administrations National Environmental Policy Act regulations. Construction is expected to start in the spring of 2011, with operation under way in winter 2011. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of transportation access and transit-related infrastructure in both the Northern and Southern Areas would help support existing and future year-round recreational use. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Cumulative impacts would include minor increases in air emissions, habitat loss which may decrease wildlife in the area, loss of wetlands, and possible minimal effect on water quality, and visual resources. Implementation would require acquisition of 13.6 acres of privately owned property for construction of the proposed paved access road and non-motorized, paved, separated pathway. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100191, Draft EIS--259 pages, Appendices A through K--543 pages, Appendices L through S--339 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Land Use KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Fish KW - Parking KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Roads KW - Ski Areas KW - Trails KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Executive Order 11990, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827297?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. [Part 6 of 6] T2 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. AN - 756827216; 14342-100191_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of transit-related improvements to develop transportation access and infrastructure at both the Northern and Southern areas of the Hatcher Pass Recreational Area located 55 miles north of Anchorage, Alaska is proposed. Hatcher Pass is a popular year-round recreational area in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough (MSB) that has experienced a steady annual increase in visitation numbers over the last decade and an increase of 34 percent between 2008 and 2009. Current recreational use of the areas includes Nordic and Alpine skiing, snowboarding, all-terrain vehicle and snowmobile use, mountain biking, hiking, mountain racing, sledding, hunting, horseback riding, berry picking, and paragliding. Both Hatcher Pass Recreational Area Access, Trails, and Transit Facilities project (Hatcher Pass Transit Project) areas fall within the Government Peak subunit of Hatcher Pass where the MSB owns and manages 3,000 acres of land. The remainder is owned by Alaska Department of Natural Resources and is leased and managed by the MSB. The proposed action would include construction of the following improvements: paved access roads (upgrade/realignment of existing gravel road in the Northern Area; new access road in the Southern Area); paved parking lots with lighting (upgrade of existing gravel parking lot in Northern Area to accommodate 413 vehicles and two buses; new parking lot in Southern Area to accommodate 210 vehicles and six buses); enclosed 20- to 30-passenger transit facilities with restrooms includes heating and lighting; utility extensions (i.e., telephone or fiber-optic cable and electrical lines); additional proposed improvements in the Southern Area including a paved non-motorized separated pathway that would parallel the new access road. This draft EIS analyzes the proposed project and a No Action Alternative. It also includes secondary analysis of a separately funded project to develop Nordic and Alpine ski areas in conjunction with the proposed construction of roads, parking lots, and transit facility improvements. However, the proposed transportation improvements are needed whether the MSBs ski area improvements are constructed or not, and thus they have independent utility as defined by the Federal Transit Administrations National Environmental Policy Act regulations. Construction is expected to start in the spring of 2011, with operation under way in winter 2011. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of transportation access and transit-related infrastructure in both the Northern and Southern Areas would help support existing and future year-round recreational use. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Cumulative impacts would include minor increases in air emissions, habitat loss which may decrease wildlife in the area, loss of wetlands, and possible minimal effect on water quality, and visual resources. Implementation would require acquisition of 13.6 acres of privately owned property for construction of the proposed paved access road and non-motorized, paved, separated pathway. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100191, Draft EIS--259 pages, Appendices A through K--543 pages, Appendices L through S--339 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Land Use KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Fish KW - Parking KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Roads KW - Ski Areas KW - Trails KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Executive Order 11990, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827216?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANSBAY TERMINAL/CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION/REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 4] T2 - TRANSBAY TERMINAL/CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION/REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827210; 14344-100193_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new multimodal terminal on the site of the present Transbay Terminal and other transportation improvements and associated developments in the city of San Francisco and San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties, California are proposed. In addition to the terminal, the project would include the extension of Caltrain and California High Speed Rail underground from Caltrain's current terminus at Fourth and King streets to a new underground terminus beneath the new terminal and establishment of a redevelopment area plan with related development projects, including transit-oriented development on publicly owned land in the vicinity of the new terminal. The existing Transbay Terminal, which was built in 1939, does not meet current seismic safety or space utilization standards. The Federal Railroad Administration is adopting the portion of the March 2004 final EIS that covers Phase 1 of the Transbay Program with the intention of providing up to $400 million in funding. The 2004 final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative, two alternatives with respect to the terminal, two alternatives with respect to the Caltrain extension, and two alternatives with respect to the Transbay redevelopment plan. Under the full-build alternative, the Transbay redevelopment plan alternatives would result in the construction of 7.6 million square feet of residential, office, retail, and hotel space, including 5.6 million square feet of residential development within 4,700 units, 1.2 million square feet of office space, 475,000 square feet of hotel development, and 355,000 square feet of retail space. The Phase 1 cost is estimated at $1.59 billion in year of expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The modernization of the terminal facility would provide for a more adequate facility that would meet seismic standards and would also provide the opportunity to revitalize the surrounding area with a mix of land uses that include both market-rate and affordable housing and to extend Caltrain service from its current terminus outside the downtown area into the San Francisco employment core. Increases in Caltrain and other transit ridership, reductions in non-transit vehicle use, and improvements in regional air quality would be expected. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Numerous residences and businesses would be displaced. Demolition of the existing terminal would result in the loss of a structure eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, as well as the loss of the terminal loop ramp, a contributing element to the historic Bay Bridge. Traffic levels would increase significantly in the vicinity of the project, and project facilities would displace parking spaces in the area. Wind velocities would exceed city standards in portions of the redevelopment area. Vibration impacts would occur in the vicinity of four buildings due to operation of the Caltrain extension. LEGAL MANDATES: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 03-0088D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 04-0441F, Volume 28, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100193, Final EIS Reevaluation--412 pages, March 2004 Final EIS Volume 1--622 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Buildings KW - Commercial Zones KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hotels KW - Housing KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Transportation KW - Underground Structures KW - Urban Development KW - Urban Renewal KW - California KW - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Funding KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827210?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANSBAY+TERMINAL%2FCALTRAIN+DOWNTOWN+EXTENSION%2FREDEVELOPMENT+PROJECT+IN+THE+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+SAN+MATEO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=TRANSBAY+TERMINAL%2FCALTRAIN+DOWNTOWN+EXTENSION%2FREDEVELOPMENT+PROJECT+IN+THE+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+SAN+MATEO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANSBAY TERMINAL/CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION/REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 4] T2 - TRANSBAY TERMINAL/CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION/REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827197; 14344-100193_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new multimodal terminal on the site of the present Transbay Terminal and other transportation improvements and associated developments in the city of San Francisco and San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties, California are proposed. In addition to the terminal, the project would include the extension of Caltrain and California High Speed Rail underground from Caltrain's current terminus at Fourth and King streets to a new underground terminus beneath the new terminal and establishment of a redevelopment area plan with related development projects, including transit-oriented development on publicly owned land in the vicinity of the new terminal. The existing Transbay Terminal, which was built in 1939, does not meet current seismic safety or space utilization standards. The Federal Railroad Administration is adopting the portion of the March 2004 final EIS that covers Phase 1 of the Transbay Program with the intention of providing up to $400 million in funding. The 2004 final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative, two alternatives with respect to the terminal, two alternatives with respect to the Caltrain extension, and two alternatives with respect to the Transbay redevelopment plan. Under the full-build alternative, the Transbay redevelopment plan alternatives would result in the construction of 7.6 million square feet of residential, office, retail, and hotel space, including 5.6 million square feet of residential development within 4,700 units, 1.2 million square feet of office space, 475,000 square feet of hotel development, and 355,000 square feet of retail space. The Phase 1 cost is estimated at $1.59 billion in year of expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The modernization of the terminal facility would provide for a more adequate facility that would meet seismic standards and would also provide the opportunity to revitalize the surrounding area with a mix of land uses that include both market-rate and affordable housing and to extend Caltrain service from its current terminus outside the downtown area into the San Francisco employment core. Increases in Caltrain and other transit ridership, reductions in non-transit vehicle use, and improvements in regional air quality would be expected. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Numerous residences and businesses would be displaced. Demolition of the existing terminal would result in the loss of a structure eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, as well as the loss of the terminal loop ramp, a contributing element to the historic Bay Bridge. Traffic levels would increase significantly in the vicinity of the project, and project facilities would displace parking spaces in the area. Wind velocities would exceed city standards in portions of the redevelopment area. Vibration impacts would occur in the vicinity of four buildings due to operation of the Caltrain extension. LEGAL MANDATES: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 03-0088D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 04-0441F, Volume 28, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100193, Final EIS Reevaluation--412 pages, March 2004 Final EIS Volume 1--622 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Buildings KW - Commercial Zones KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hotels KW - Housing KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Transportation KW - Underground Structures KW - Urban Development KW - Urban Renewal KW - California KW - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Funding KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827197?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANSBAY+TERMINAL%2FCALTRAIN+DOWNTOWN+EXTENSION%2FREDEVELOPMENT+PROJECT+IN+THE+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+SAN+MATEO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=TRANSBAY+TERMINAL%2FCALTRAIN+DOWNTOWN+EXTENSION%2FREDEVELOPMENT+PROJECT+IN+THE+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+SAN+MATEO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANSBAY TERMINAL/CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION/REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 4] T2 - TRANSBAY TERMINAL/CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION/REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827164; 14344-100193_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new multimodal terminal on the site of the present Transbay Terminal and other transportation improvements and associated developments in the city of San Francisco and San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties, California are proposed. In addition to the terminal, the project would include the extension of Caltrain and California High Speed Rail underground from Caltrain's current terminus at Fourth and King streets to a new underground terminus beneath the new terminal and establishment of a redevelopment area plan with related development projects, including transit-oriented development on publicly owned land in the vicinity of the new terminal. The existing Transbay Terminal, which was built in 1939, does not meet current seismic safety or space utilization standards. The Federal Railroad Administration is adopting the portion of the March 2004 final EIS that covers Phase 1 of the Transbay Program with the intention of providing up to $400 million in funding. The 2004 final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative, two alternatives with respect to the terminal, two alternatives with respect to the Caltrain extension, and two alternatives with respect to the Transbay redevelopment plan. Under the full-build alternative, the Transbay redevelopment plan alternatives would result in the construction of 7.6 million square feet of residential, office, retail, and hotel space, including 5.6 million square feet of residential development within 4,700 units, 1.2 million square feet of office space, 475,000 square feet of hotel development, and 355,000 square feet of retail space. The Phase 1 cost is estimated at $1.59 billion in year of expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The modernization of the terminal facility would provide for a more adequate facility that would meet seismic standards and would also provide the opportunity to revitalize the surrounding area with a mix of land uses that include both market-rate and affordable housing and to extend Caltrain service from its current terminus outside the downtown area into the San Francisco employment core. Increases in Caltrain and other transit ridership, reductions in non-transit vehicle use, and improvements in regional air quality would be expected. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Numerous residences and businesses would be displaced. Demolition of the existing terminal would result in the loss of a structure eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, as well as the loss of the terminal loop ramp, a contributing element to the historic Bay Bridge. Traffic levels would increase significantly in the vicinity of the project, and project facilities would displace parking spaces in the area. Wind velocities would exceed city standards in portions of the redevelopment area. Vibration impacts would occur in the vicinity of four buildings due to operation of the Caltrain extension. LEGAL MANDATES: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 03-0088D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 04-0441F, Volume 28, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100193, Final EIS Reevaluation--412 pages, March 2004 Final EIS Volume 1--622 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Buildings KW - Commercial Zones KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hotels KW - Housing KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Transportation KW - Underground Structures KW - Urban Development KW - Urban Renewal KW - California KW - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Funding KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827164?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANSBAY+TERMINAL%2FCALTRAIN+DOWNTOWN+EXTENSION%2FREDEVELOPMENT+PROJECT+IN+THE+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+SAN+MATEO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=TRANSBAY+TERMINAL%2FCALTRAIN+DOWNTOWN+EXTENSION%2FREDEVELOPMENT+PROJECT+IN+THE+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+SAN+MATEO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. [Part 5 of 6] T2 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. AN - 756827104; 14342-100191_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of transit-related improvements to develop transportation access and infrastructure at both the Northern and Southern areas of the Hatcher Pass Recreational Area located 55 miles north of Anchorage, Alaska is proposed. Hatcher Pass is a popular year-round recreational area in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough (MSB) that has experienced a steady annual increase in visitation numbers over the last decade and an increase of 34 percent between 2008 and 2009. Current recreational use of the areas includes Nordic and Alpine skiing, snowboarding, all-terrain vehicle and snowmobile use, mountain biking, hiking, mountain racing, sledding, hunting, horseback riding, berry picking, and paragliding. Both Hatcher Pass Recreational Area Access, Trails, and Transit Facilities project (Hatcher Pass Transit Project) areas fall within the Government Peak subunit of Hatcher Pass where the MSB owns and manages 3,000 acres of land. The remainder is owned by Alaska Department of Natural Resources and is leased and managed by the MSB. The proposed action would include construction of the following improvements: paved access roads (upgrade/realignment of existing gravel road in the Northern Area; new access road in the Southern Area); paved parking lots with lighting (upgrade of existing gravel parking lot in Northern Area to accommodate 413 vehicles and two buses; new parking lot in Southern Area to accommodate 210 vehicles and six buses); enclosed 20- to 30-passenger transit facilities with restrooms includes heating and lighting; utility extensions (i.e., telephone or fiber-optic cable and electrical lines); additional proposed improvements in the Southern Area including a paved non-motorized separated pathway that would parallel the new access road. This draft EIS analyzes the proposed project and a No Action Alternative. It also includes secondary analysis of a separately funded project to develop Nordic and Alpine ski areas in conjunction with the proposed construction of roads, parking lots, and transit facility improvements. However, the proposed transportation improvements are needed whether the MSBs ski area improvements are constructed or not, and thus they have independent utility as defined by the Federal Transit Administrations National Environmental Policy Act regulations. Construction is expected to start in the spring of 2011, with operation under way in winter 2011. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of transportation access and transit-related infrastructure in both the Northern and Southern Areas would help support existing and future year-round recreational use. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Cumulative impacts would include minor increases in air emissions, habitat loss which may decrease wildlife in the area, loss of wetlands, and possible minimal effect on water quality, and visual resources. Implementation would require acquisition of 13.6 acres of privately owned property for construction of the proposed paved access road and non-motorized, paved, separated pathway. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100191, Draft EIS--259 pages, Appendices A through K--543 pages, Appendices L through S--339 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Land Use KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Fish KW - Parking KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Roads KW - Ski Areas KW - Trails KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Executive Order 11990, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827104?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - EAST LAKE SAMMAMISH MASTER PLAN TRAIL, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 754908393; 14343 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a pedestrian/equestrian trail along approximately 11 miles of former Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor on the east side of Lake Sammamish in King County, Washington is proposed. The trail would extend from Gilman Boulevard in the city of Issaquah northward to the Bear Creek Trail in the city of Redmond. Portions of the railroad corridor have already been developed into an interim use trail, which has been evaluated in previous environmental assessment documents. The interim use trail provides a gravel surface, eight to 12 feet wide and the proposed action is to develop it into a permanent trail. This final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative and four trail alternatives. The multi-use trail proposed would provide both paved and soft surfaces to accommodate pedestrians, non-motorized wheeled vehicles, and equestrians. The Corridor Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would locate the trail within the former railroad rights-of-way. The majority of the trail would encompass the existing interim use trail, with the trail leaving the existing trail only in those places where trail safety would be improved by such alterations. This alternative would include vehicular parking and restroom facilities. The East Alternatives (A and B) would use the former rights-of-way in certain segments but would transition to the roadway shoulder of East Lake Sammamish Parkway in several sections. The Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative would maintain the existing 10.6-mile interim use trail beyond the currently authorized 2015 expiration date. The trail would be extended north over Bear Creek, and parking and restroom facilities would be provided. Equestrian use is not permitted on the existing trail, but would be considered under this alternative. Costs of the Corridor Alternative, the East A/B Alternative, and the Continuation of the Interim Use Trail Alternative are estimated at $34.9 million, $68.7 million, and $7.9 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The trail would help to respond to regional needs for alternative transportation corridors between major business centers, for non-motorized recreational trails to support a growing multi-use population, and for the purpose of making connections between other existing trails in the regional trail system. Access to recreation, employment, and retail centers in the cities of Redmond, Sammamish, and Issaquah would be enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Trail development under the East Alternatives would result in 58 to 61 partial property takings, 15 to 18 full property takings, and 12 to 15 residential relocations. Unless additional relocations were undertaken in areas where residences were proximate to the trail, visual landscapes would be affected for both residents and trail users. In addition, the project would displace of up to 1.2 acres of wetland and 2.4 acres of streambank vegetation, impact up to 4.1 acres of wetland buffer, and increase impervious surface in the corridor by up to 20 acres. The trail would traverse up to 22 streams, requiring the construction of culverts. Trail crossings of roadways would result in conflicts between drivers and trail users that would constitute safety hazards. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0590D, Volume 30, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100192, Final EIS--663pages and maps and CD-ROM, Plan Sheets--88 pages and maps; Technical Appendices--83 pages and maps, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Fisheries Surveys KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Funding KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908393?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=EAST+LAKE+SAMMAMISH+MASTER+PLAN+TRAIL%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 520 BRIDGE REPLACMENT AND HOV PROGRAM, PONTOON CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, GRAY HARBOR AND PIERCE COUNTIES, WASHINGTON. AN - 754908269; 14337 AB - PURPOSE: A new facility in Grays Harbor, Washington and potential use of an existing facility in Tacoma, Washington to expedite the construction of pontoons required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge over Lake Washington are proposed. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project is one of four projects in the SR 520 Bridge Replacement and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Program, which is a collection of roadway improvements designed to improve mobility and enhance safety and improve operation throughout the SR 520 corridors. The SR 520 Pontoon Construction Project involves building 33 pontoons needed to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge in its current configuration as a four-lane bridge. A new facility for pontoon construction in Grays Harbor would be built and a smaller, existing facility owned by Concrete Technology Corporation, Inc. (CTC) in Tacoma could be used to begin pontoon construction while the new facility is being built. The Evergreen Point Bridge has been damaged by past windstorms and is vulnerable to catastrophic failure. It is a critical component of the Puget Sound regions transportation infrastructure, and the consequences of bridge failure would be severe. This draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two alternative sites on Grays Harbor: the Anderson & Middleton Alternative in Hoquiam, Washington; and the Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative in Aberdeen, Washington. Both Grays Harbor build alternatives would involve construction of a new casting basin facility positioned a few hundred feet from the shoreline and partitioned into two separate work chambers. Completed pontoons would be stored in Grays Harbor in at least 25 feet of water until needed. Based on the current schedule for the planned bridge replacement, pontoons could be stored for an estimated 18 months if there is no catastrophic bridge failure. Pontoons built at the Tacoma CTC facility would be stored at existing marine berths in Puget Sound for up to four years if there were no bridge failure. The Aberdeen Log Yard Alternative is the preferred alternative as the site would allow the use of shorter foundation piles that would result in substantial cost savings. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would shorten the time required to replace the Evergreen Point Bridge if the bridge were ever damaged beyond repair from 5 years to just 1.5 years. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would affect one acre of palustrine wetlands and 0.4 acre of estuarine wetlands. The launch channel would require excavation of 5 acres within the shoreline, including mudflats and subtidal habitat. Construction equipment would be visible from residences on south-facing hillsides at either site. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100186, Executive Summary--27 pages, Draft EIS--345 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Grays Harbor KW - Lake Washington KW - Puget Sound KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908269?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=SR+520+BRIDGE+REPLACMENT+AND+HOV+PROGRAM%2C+PONTOON+CONSTRUCTION+PROJECT%2C+GRAY+HARBOR+AND+PIERCE+COUNTIES%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HATCHER PASS RECREATIONAL AREA ACCESS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES, HATCHER PASS, ALASKA. AN - 15236325; 14342 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of transit-related improvements to develop transportation access and infrastructure at both the Northern and Southern areas of the Hatcher Pass Recreational Area located 55 miles north of Anchorage, Alaska is proposed. Hatcher Pass is a popular year-round recreational area in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough (MSB) that has experienced a steady annual increase in visitation numbers over the last decade and an increase of 34 percent between 2008 and 2009. Current recreational use of the areas includes Nordic and Alpine skiing, snowboarding, all-terrain vehicle and snowmobile use, mountain biking, hiking, mountain racing, sledding, hunting, horseback riding, berry picking, and paragliding. Both Hatcher Pass Recreational Area Access, Trails, and Transit Facilities project (Hatcher Pass Transit Project) areas fall within the Government Peak subunit of Hatcher Pass where the MSB owns and manages 3,000 acres of land. The remainder is owned by Alaska Department of Natural Resources and is leased and managed by the MSB. The proposed action would include construction of the following improvements: paved access roads (upgrade/realignment of existing gravel road in the Northern Area; new access road in the Southern Area); paved parking lots with lighting (upgrade of existing gravel parking lot in Northern Area to accommodate 413 vehicles and two buses; new parking lot in Southern Area to accommodate 210 vehicles and six buses); enclosed 20- to 30-passenger transit facilities with restrooms includes heating and lighting; utility extensions (i.e., telephone or fiber-optic cable and electrical lines); additional proposed improvements in the Southern Area including a paved non-motorized separated pathway that would parallel the new access road. This draft EIS analyzes the proposed project and a No Action Alternative. It also includes secondary analysis of a separately funded project to develop Nordic and Alpine ski areas in conjunction with the proposed construction of roads, parking lots, and transit facility improvements. However, the proposed transportation improvements are needed whether the MSBs ski area improvements are constructed or not, and thus they have independent utility as defined by the Federal Transit Administrations National Environmental Policy Act regulations. Construction is expected to start in the spring of 2011, with operation under way in winter 2011. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The development of transportation access and transit-related infrastructure in both the Northern and Southern Areas would help support existing and future year-round recreational use. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Cumulative impacts would include minor increases in air emissions, habitat loss which may decrease wildlife in the area, loss of wetlands, and possible minimal effect on water quality, and visual resources. Implementation would require acquisition of 13.6 acres of privately owned property for construction of the proposed paved access road and non-motorized, paved, separated pathway. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100191, Draft EIS--259 pages, Appendices A through K--543 pages, Appendices L through S--339 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Land Use KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Fish KW - Parking KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Roads KW - Ski Areas KW - Trails KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Alaska KW - Executive Order 11990, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/15236325?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=HATCHER+PASS+RECREATIONAL+AREA+ACCESS%2C+TRAILS%2C+AND+TRANSIT+FACILITIES%2C+HATCHER+PASS%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Seattle, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANSBAY TERMINAL/CALTRAIN DOWNTOWN EXTENSION/REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 15233802; 14344 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new multimodal terminal on the site of the present Transbay Terminal and other transportation improvements and associated developments in the city of San Francisco and San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties, California are proposed. In addition to the terminal, the project would include the extension of Caltrain and California High Speed Rail underground from Caltrain's current terminus at Fourth and King streets to a new underground terminus beneath the new terminal and establishment of a redevelopment area plan with related development projects, including transit-oriented development on publicly owned land in the vicinity of the new terminal. The existing Transbay Terminal, which was built in 1939, does not meet current seismic safety or space utilization standards. The Federal Railroad Administration is adopting the portion of the March 2004 final EIS that covers Phase 1 of the Transbay Program with the intention of providing up to $400 million in funding. The 2004 final EIS addresses a No Action Alternative, two alternatives with respect to the terminal, two alternatives with respect to the Caltrain extension, and two alternatives with respect to the Transbay redevelopment plan. Under the full-build alternative, the Transbay redevelopment plan alternatives would result in the construction of 7.6 million square feet of residential, office, retail, and hotel space, including 5.6 million square feet of residential development within 4,700 units, 1.2 million square feet of office space, 475,000 square feet of hotel development, and 355,000 square feet of retail space. The Phase 1 cost is estimated at $1.59 billion in year of expenditure dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The modernization of the terminal facility would provide for a more adequate facility that would meet seismic standards and would also provide the opportunity to revitalize the surrounding area with a mix of land uses that include both market-rate and affordable housing and to extend Caltrain service from its current terminus outside the downtown area into the San Francisco employment core. Increases in Caltrain and other transit ridership, reductions in non-transit vehicle use, and improvements in regional air quality would be expected. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Numerous residences and businesses would be displaced. Demolition of the existing terminal would result in the loss of a structure eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, as well as the loss of the terminal loop ramp, a contributing element to the historic Bay Bridge. Traffic levels would increase significantly in the vicinity of the project, and project facilities would displace parking spaces in the area. Wind velocities would exceed city standards in portions of the redevelopment area. Vibration impacts would occur in the vicinity of four buildings due to operation of the Caltrain extension. LEGAL MANDATES: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 03-0088D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 04-0441F, Volume 28, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100193, Final EIS Reevaluation--412 pages, March 2004 Final EIS Volume 1--622 pages, May 21, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Buildings KW - Commercial Zones KW - Demolition KW - Earthquakes KW - Employment KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Hotels KW - Housing KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Transportation KW - Underground Structures KW - Urban Development KW - Urban Renewal KW - California KW - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Funding KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/15233802?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANSBAY+TERMINAL%2FCALTRAIN+DOWNTOWN+EXTENSION%2FREDEVELOPMENT+PROJECT+IN+THE+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+SAN+MATEO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=TRANSBAY+TERMINAL%2FCALTRAIN+DOWNTOWN+EXTENSION%2FREDEVELOPMENT+PROJECT+IN+THE+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+SAN+MATEO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-13 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - How State DOTs will Implement the Executive Order T2 - 34th t Annual Conference of the Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM 2010) AN - 754256199; 5795947 JF - 34th t Annual Conference of the Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM 2010) AU - Krolak, Josheph Y1 - 2010/05/16/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 May 16 KW - U 2000:Biological Sciences UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754256199?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=34th+t+Annual+Conference+of+the+Association+of+State+Floodplain+Managers+%28ASFPM+2010%29&rft.atitle=How+State+DOTs+will+Implement+the+Executive+Order&rft.au=Krolak%2C+Josheph&rft.aulast=Krolak&rft.aufirst=Josheph&rft.date=2010-05-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=34th+t+Annual+Conference+of+the+Association+of+State+Floodplain+Managers+%28ASFPM+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.floods.org/ace-files/Conferences/OKC/ASFPM_2010_Conference_ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Where's the Flood? T2 - 34th t Annual Conference of the Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM 2010) AN - 754236690; 5796032 JF - 34th t Annual Conference of the Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM 2010) AU - Lewis, Leslie AU - Vieux, Jean Y1 - 2010/05/16/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 May 16 KW - Floods KW - U 2000:Biological Sciences UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754236690?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=34th+t+Annual+Conference+of+the+Association+of+State+Floodplain+Managers+%28ASFPM+2010%29&rft.atitle=Where%27s+the+Flood%3F&rft.au=Lewis%2C+Leslie%3BVieux%2C+Jean&rft.aulast=Lewis&rft.aufirst=Leslie&rft.date=2010-05-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=34th+t+Annual+Conference+of+the+Association+of+State+Floodplain+Managers+%28ASFPM+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.floods.org/ace-files/Conferences/OKC/ASFPM_2010_Conference_ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Checking Steel Girder Stability during Erection - Rules of Thumb Modified by AASHTO LRFD T2 - 2010 Structures Congress/North American Steel Construction Conference (NASCC 2010) AN - 754217238; 5775078 JF - 2010 Structures Congress/North American Steel Construction Conference (NASCC 2010) AU - Hastings, John AU - Zhao, Qiuhong AU - Burdette, Edwin Y1 - 2010/05/12/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 May 12 KW - Steel KW - U 7000:Multidisciplinary UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754217238?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2010+Structures+Congress%2FNorth+American+Steel+Construction+Conference+%28NASCC+2010%29&rft.atitle=Checking+Steel+Girder+Stability+during+Erection+-+Rules+of+Thumb+Modified+by+AASHTO+LRFD&rft.au=Hastings%2C+John%3BZhao%2C+Qiuhong%3BBurdette%2C+Edwin&rft.aulast=Hastings&rft.aufirst=John&rft.date=2010-05-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2010+Structures+Congress%2FNorth+American+Steel+Construction+Conference+%28NASCC+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://submissions.miracd.com/ASCE/Structures2010/Itinerary/Conference LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Bridge Load Testing: Cost-Benefit Evaluation T2 - 2010 Structures Congress/North American Steel Construction Conference (NASCC 2010) AN - 754213513; 5775088 JF - 2010 Structures Congress/North American Steel Construction Conference (NASCC 2010) AU - Alampalli, S AU - Ettouney, M Y1 - 2010/05/12/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 May 12 KW - U 7000:Multidisciplinary UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754213513?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2010+Structures+Congress%2FNorth+American+Steel+Construction+Conference+%28NASCC+2010%29&rft.atitle=Bridge+Load+Testing%3A+Cost-Benefit+Evaluation&rft.au=Alampalli%2C+S%3BEttouney%2C+M&rft.aulast=Alampalli&rft.aufirst=S&rft.date=2010-05-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2010+Structures+Congress%2FNorth+American+Steel+Construction+Conference+%28NASCC+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://submissions.miracd.com/ASCE/Structures2010/Itinerary/Conference LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Icons of Movable Bridges Utilizing Orthotropic Steel Decks T2 - 2010 Structures Congress/North American Steel Construction Conference (NASCC 2010) AN - 754203140; 5775007 JF - 2010 Structures Congress/North American Steel Construction Conference (NASCC 2010) AU - Copelan, Craig AU - Huang, Carl AU - Mangus, Alfred Y1 - 2010/05/12/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 May 12 KW - Bridges KW - Steel KW - U 7000:Multidisciplinary UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754203140?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2010+Structures+Congress%2FNorth+American+Steel+Construction+Conference+%28NASCC+2010%29&rft.atitle=Icons+of+Movable+Bridges+Utilizing+Orthotropic+Steel+Decks&rft.au=Copelan%2C+Craig%3BHuang%2C+Carl%3BMangus%2C+Alfred&rft.aulast=Copelan&rft.aufirst=Craig&rft.date=2010-05-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2010+Structures+Congress%2FNorth+American+Steel+Construction+Conference+%28NASCC+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://submissions.miracd.com/ASCE/Structures2010/Itinerary/Conference LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 7 of 8] T2 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756827436; 14321-100170_0007 AB - PURPOSE: A multimodal transportation concept for the Elgin O'Hare-West Bypass (EO-WB) study area in Cook and DuPage counties, Illinois is proposed. The six-county Chicago metropolitan area is home to more than nine million people, 5.1 million jobs, and a $500 billion economy. The EO-WB study area is 17 miles northwest of Chicago's central business district and is strategically located at a transportation crossroads that includes: O'Hare International Airport; a network of freeways and tollways including Interstate-90 (I-90), I-190, I-294, Elgin O'Hare Expressway and I-290; transit facilities (including Metra rail lines and Pace bus service); and freight rail service and multimodal transfer facilities. Eighteen percent of all vehicle trips in the region occur in the EO-WB study area and roughly 86 percent of the area's interstate highways and major arterials are congested with that figure projected to grow to 91 percent by 2030. Congestion on major roads will spill over to secondary roads, with 70 percent of minor arterials congested by 2030 and travel delay increasing to 52 percent. The study area comprises 127 square miles and 27 communities. This final Tier One EIS considers a No Action Alternative, which includes currently funded projects, and two build alternatives. Alternative 203, which is the preferred alternative, would consist of upgrading and extending the Elgin OHare Expressway between IL 19/Gary Avenue to the OHare West Bypass for about 10 miles. Between IL 19/Gary Avenue and I-290, the expressway would be widened and upgraded along the existing alignment. East of I-290, extending to the West Bypass and the proposed OHare West Terminal, Thorndale Road would be upgraded to a new full-access control freeway. Alternative 203 also includes the OHare West Bypass, a freeway section that would extend from I-90, south along the western edge of OHare Airport to the Bensenville Yard. The bypass would then tunnel under and extend east along the north side of Green Street/Franklin Avenue before turning south to connect with I-294. South Bypass Connection Option D was identified as the preferred alignment for connecting to I-294 beginning at the tunnel under the Bensenville Yard. The freeway would extend southeast along the north edge of Green Street, then cross the Union Pacific Railroad and proceed south, paralleling the east side of the railroad, to a new system connection with I-294 near Grand Avenue. A new bridge that reconnects Taft Road across the Bensenville Yard, linking Franklin Avenue and IL 19 would be constructed, and a full access system interchange would be provided at I-294. The overall length of the OHare West Bypass would be 6.2 miles. The freeway would consist of four basic lanes in each direction with additional auxiliary lanes at interchanges, and a 70-foot median would accommodate transit service north of Thorndale Avenue. System interchanges are proposed at I-90, the Elgin OHare Expressway, and I-294. Service interchanges are proposed at IL 72, Devon/Pratt, the proposed OHare West Terminal, IL 19, and Green Street/Franklin Street. Improvements include a transit corridor along the J-Line west corridor from the proposed OHare West Terminal station to the Schaumburg Metra Milwaukee District West station. Another proposed transit improvement is the J-Line northwest that would extend from the Elgin OHare corridor north along IL 53 to the Woodfield Mall area. Other elements of the transit plan include extending the Chicago Transit Authority Blue Line service from OHares terminal core to the proposed OHare West Terminal, and the STAR Line rail service from the OHare West Terminal to the I-90 corridor where the service would be extended west. Express bus service is proposed on I-355, Golf Road, Dempster Street, Irving Park Road, and Mannheim Road. Shuttle bus service is proposed between the Schaumburg Metra Station and Hanover Park Metra Station. Extending the J-Line as a higher capacity transit service to the Hanover Park Metra Station will be evaluated in Tier Two. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would increase the overall system efficiency up to 10 percent, reduce congestion on secondary roads up to 15 percent, increase speed up to eight percent, and increase transit trips. The preferred alternative would directly create 9,200 jobs per year. Project investment would include added job growth totaling 21,600. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would entail loss of 39 acres of wetlands, 25 acres of floodplains, and 0.95 acres of Section 4(f) property (forest preserve and trails). Eleven homes, 28 industrial structures, 12 commercial structures, 35 businesses and 1,277 employees would be displaced. Tax revenue loss would be up to $4.47 million. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0434D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100170, 1,066 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Employment KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Watersheds KW - Wetlands KW - Illinois UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827436?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Springfield, Illinois; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 2 of 8] T2 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756827431; 14321-100170_0002 AB - PURPOSE: A multimodal transportation concept for the Elgin O'Hare-West Bypass (EO-WB) study area in Cook and DuPage counties, Illinois is proposed. The six-county Chicago metropolitan area is home to more than nine million people, 5.1 million jobs, and a $500 billion economy. The EO-WB study area is 17 miles northwest of Chicago's central business district and is strategically located at a transportation crossroads that includes: O'Hare International Airport; a network of freeways and tollways including Interstate-90 (I-90), I-190, I-294, Elgin O'Hare Expressway and I-290; transit facilities (including Metra rail lines and Pace bus service); and freight rail service and multimodal transfer facilities. Eighteen percent of all vehicle trips in the region occur in the EO-WB study area and roughly 86 percent of the area's interstate highways and major arterials are congested with that figure projected to grow to 91 percent by 2030. Congestion on major roads will spill over to secondary roads, with 70 percent of minor arterials congested by 2030 and travel delay increasing to 52 percent. The study area comprises 127 square miles and 27 communities. This final Tier One EIS considers a No Action Alternative, which includes currently funded projects, and two build alternatives. Alternative 203, which is the preferred alternative, would consist of upgrading and extending the Elgin OHare Expressway between IL 19/Gary Avenue to the OHare West Bypass for about 10 miles. Between IL 19/Gary Avenue and I-290, the expressway would be widened and upgraded along the existing alignment. East of I-290, extending to the West Bypass and the proposed OHare West Terminal, Thorndale Road would be upgraded to a new full-access control freeway. Alternative 203 also includes the OHare West Bypass, a freeway section that would extend from I-90, south along the western edge of OHare Airport to the Bensenville Yard. The bypass would then tunnel under and extend east along the north side of Green Street/Franklin Avenue before turning south to connect with I-294. South Bypass Connection Option D was identified as the preferred alignment for connecting to I-294 beginning at the tunnel under the Bensenville Yard. The freeway would extend southeast along the north edge of Green Street, then cross the Union Pacific Railroad and proceed south, paralleling the east side of the railroad, to a new system connection with I-294 near Grand Avenue. A new bridge that reconnects Taft Road across the Bensenville Yard, linking Franklin Avenue and IL 19 would be constructed, and a full access system interchange would be provided at I-294. The overall length of the OHare West Bypass would be 6.2 miles. The freeway would consist of four basic lanes in each direction with additional auxiliary lanes at interchanges, and a 70-foot median would accommodate transit service north of Thorndale Avenue. System interchanges are proposed at I-90, the Elgin OHare Expressway, and I-294. Service interchanges are proposed at IL 72, Devon/Pratt, the proposed OHare West Terminal, IL 19, and Green Street/Franklin Street. Improvements include a transit corridor along the J-Line west corridor from the proposed OHare West Terminal station to the Schaumburg Metra Milwaukee District West station. Another proposed transit improvement is the J-Line northwest that would extend from the Elgin OHare corridor north along IL 53 to the Woodfield Mall area. Other elements of the transit plan include extending the Chicago Transit Authority Blue Line service from OHares terminal core to the proposed OHare West Terminal, and the STAR Line rail service from the OHare West Terminal to the I-90 corridor where the service would be extended west. Express bus service is proposed on I-355, Golf Road, Dempster Street, Irving Park Road, and Mannheim Road. Shuttle bus service is proposed between the Schaumburg Metra Station and Hanover Park Metra Station. Extending the J-Line as a higher capacity transit service to the Hanover Park Metra Station will be evaluated in Tier Two. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would increase the overall system efficiency up to 10 percent, reduce congestion on secondary roads up to 15 percent, increase speed up to eight percent, and increase transit trips. The preferred alternative would directly create 9,200 jobs per year. Project investment would include added job growth totaling 21,600. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would entail loss of 39 acres of wetlands, 25 acres of floodplains, and 0.95 acres of Section 4(f) property (forest preserve and trails). Eleven homes, 28 industrial structures, 12 commercial structures, 35 businesses and 1,277 employees would be displaced. Tax revenue loss would be up to $4.47 million. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0434D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100170, 1,066 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Employment KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Watersheds KW - Wetlands KW - Illinois UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827431?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Springfield, Illinois; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 93 IMPROVEMENTS, SALEM TO MANCHESTER, HILLSBOROUGH AND ROCKINGHAM COUNTIES, NEW HAMPSHIRE (IM-IR-93-1(174)0, 10418-C) (FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF APRIL, 2004). [Part 3 of 3] T2 - INTERSTATE 93 IMPROVEMENTS, SALEM TO MANCHESTER, HILLSBOROUGH AND ROCKINGHAM COUNTIES, NEW HAMPSHIRE (IM-IR-93-1(174)0, 10418-C) (FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF APRIL, 2004). AN - 756827418; 14322-100171_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 19.8-mile segment of Interstate 93 (I-93) from the Massachusetts/New Hampshire state line northward through the towns of Salem, Windham, Derry, and Londonderry, to the I-93/I-293 interchange in the city of Manchester, New Hampshire is proposed. I-93 is principal north-south arterial within the state of New Hampshire and part of the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. Due to population growth and development, the travel demands for I-93 between Salem and Manchester have exceeded the capacity of the existing four-lane facility for a number of years. Alternatives considered in the final EIS of April, 2004 include a No-Build Alternative, transportation system management and transportation demand management alternatives, widening of the highway combined with interchange improvements, and alternative modes of transportation. The selected alternative would involve widening I-93 from the existing limited access, two-lane highway in each direction to a limited access, four-lane highway in each direction. Five existing interchanges and crossroads within the project corridor would be reconstructed. In addition, three new park-and-ride facilities would be provided, one each at exits 2, 3, and 5, and bus service and ride-sharing opportunities to Boston and northern Massachusetts would be expanded. A bike path would be integrated into the highway project and space would be reserved in the median to accommodate future commuter light rail trains. Current cost of the selected alternative is estimated at $794.4 million in future year of construction dollars. A District of New Hampshire court decision on August 30, 2007 held that traffic projections in the 2004 final EIS relied on an outdated population growth forecast. The court directed preparation of this supplemental EIS, which considers the effects of induced population and employment growth estimates on the effectiveness of the selected alternative in reducing traffic congestion, traffic on secondary roads, and air quality. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase transportation efficiency within the corridor by reducing congestion and enhancing safety. By allowing for a more efficient flow of traffic, the proposed alternative would result in decreased emissions of hydrocarbon pollutants and increased energy efficiency. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would result in the displacement of 19 residences and 23 business structures. Nine acres of important farmland soils, 77 acres of wetlands, and one state-listed protected species, the wild lupine, would be impacted. Displacements of wetland and upland areas would total 260 acres. Approximately 98 acres of stratified drift aquifer would be covered with impervious roadway surface, and the project would require lengthening culverts at many of the 21 stream crossings. Six acre-feet of floodway and 43 acre-feet of floodplain would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards, but sound walls would be provided. The project would affect 23 archaeological sites and six historically significant properties. Construction activities could encounter an estimated 13 hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 09-0315D, Volume 33, Number 3. For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 03-0086D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 04-0454F, Volume 28, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100171, 645 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NH-EIS-02-01-FS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Floodways KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Population KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - New Hampshire KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Archaeologic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827418?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+93+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+SALEM+TO+MANCHESTER%2C+HILLSBOROUGH+AND+ROCKINGHAM+COUNTIES%2C+NEW+HAMPSHIRE+%28IM-IR-93-1%28174%290%2C+10418-C%29+%28FINAL+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+APRIL%2C+2004%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+93+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+SALEM+TO+MANCHESTER%2C+HILLSBOROUGH+AND+ROCKINGHAM+COUNTIES%2C+NEW+HAMPSHIRE+%28IM-IR-93-1%28174%290%2C+10418-C%29+%28FINAL+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+APRIL%2C+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Concord, New Hampshire; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 6 of 8] T2 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756827400; 14321-100170_0006 AB - PURPOSE: A multimodal transportation concept for the Elgin O'Hare-West Bypass (EO-WB) study area in Cook and DuPage counties, Illinois is proposed. The six-county Chicago metropolitan area is home to more than nine million people, 5.1 million jobs, and a $500 billion economy. The EO-WB study area is 17 miles northwest of Chicago's central business district and is strategically located at a transportation crossroads that includes: O'Hare International Airport; a network of freeways and tollways including Interstate-90 (I-90), I-190, I-294, Elgin O'Hare Expressway and I-290; transit facilities (including Metra rail lines and Pace bus service); and freight rail service and multimodal transfer facilities. Eighteen percent of all vehicle trips in the region occur in the EO-WB study area and roughly 86 percent of the area's interstate highways and major arterials are congested with that figure projected to grow to 91 percent by 2030. Congestion on major roads will spill over to secondary roads, with 70 percent of minor arterials congested by 2030 and travel delay increasing to 52 percent. The study area comprises 127 square miles and 27 communities. This final Tier One EIS considers a No Action Alternative, which includes currently funded projects, and two build alternatives. Alternative 203, which is the preferred alternative, would consist of upgrading and extending the Elgin OHare Expressway between IL 19/Gary Avenue to the OHare West Bypass for about 10 miles. Between IL 19/Gary Avenue and I-290, the expressway would be widened and upgraded along the existing alignment. East of I-290, extending to the West Bypass and the proposed OHare West Terminal, Thorndale Road would be upgraded to a new full-access control freeway. Alternative 203 also includes the OHare West Bypass, a freeway section that would extend from I-90, south along the western edge of OHare Airport to the Bensenville Yard. The bypass would then tunnel under and extend east along the north side of Green Street/Franklin Avenue before turning south to connect with I-294. South Bypass Connection Option D was identified as the preferred alignment for connecting to I-294 beginning at the tunnel under the Bensenville Yard. The freeway would extend southeast along the north edge of Green Street, then cross the Union Pacific Railroad and proceed south, paralleling the east side of the railroad, to a new system connection with I-294 near Grand Avenue. A new bridge that reconnects Taft Road across the Bensenville Yard, linking Franklin Avenue and IL 19 would be constructed, and a full access system interchange would be provided at I-294. The overall length of the OHare West Bypass would be 6.2 miles. The freeway would consist of four basic lanes in each direction with additional auxiliary lanes at interchanges, and a 70-foot median would accommodate transit service north of Thorndale Avenue. System interchanges are proposed at I-90, the Elgin OHare Expressway, and I-294. Service interchanges are proposed at IL 72, Devon/Pratt, the proposed OHare West Terminal, IL 19, and Green Street/Franklin Street. Improvements include a transit corridor along the J-Line west corridor from the proposed OHare West Terminal station to the Schaumburg Metra Milwaukee District West station. Another proposed transit improvement is the J-Line northwest that would extend from the Elgin OHare corridor north along IL 53 to the Woodfield Mall area. Other elements of the transit plan include extending the Chicago Transit Authority Blue Line service from OHares terminal core to the proposed OHare West Terminal, and the STAR Line rail service from the OHare West Terminal to the I-90 corridor where the service would be extended west. Express bus service is proposed on I-355, Golf Road, Dempster Street, Irving Park Road, and Mannheim Road. Shuttle bus service is proposed between the Schaumburg Metra Station and Hanover Park Metra Station. Extending the J-Line as a higher capacity transit service to the Hanover Park Metra Station will be evaluated in Tier Two. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would increase the overall system efficiency up to 10 percent, reduce congestion on secondary roads up to 15 percent, increase speed up to eight percent, and increase transit trips. The preferred alternative would directly create 9,200 jobs per year. Project investment would include added job growth totaling 21,600. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would entail loss of 39 acres of wetlands, 25 acres of floodplains, and 0.95 acres of Section 4(f) property (forest preserve and trails). Eleven homes, 28 industrial structures, 12 commercial structures, 35 businesses and 1,277 employees would be displaced. Tax revenue loss would be up to $4.47 million. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0434D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100170, 1,066 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Employment KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Watersheds KW - Wetlands KW - Illinois UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827400?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Springfield, Illinois; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 1 of 8] T2 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756827393; 14321-100170_0001 AB - PURPOSE: A multimodal transportation concept for the Elgin O'Hare-West Bypass (EO-WB) study area in Cook and DuPage counties, Illinois is proposed. The six-county Chicago metropolitan area is home to more than nine million people, 5.1 million jobs, and a $500 billion economy. The EO-WB study area is 17 miles northwest of Chicago's central business district and is strategically located at a transportation crossroads that includes: O'Hare International Airport; a network of freeways and tollways including Interstate-90 (I-90), I-190, I-294, Elgin O'Hare Expressway and I-290; transit facilities (including Metra rail lines and Pace bus service); and freight rail service and multimodal transfer facilities. Eighteen percent of all vehicle trips in the region occur in the EO-WB study area and roughly 86 percent of the area's interstate highways and major arterials are congested with that figure projected to grow to 91 percent by 2030. Congestion on major roads will spill over to secondary roads, with 70 percent of minor arterials congested by 2030 and travel delay increasing to 52 percent. The study area comprises 127 square miles and 27 communities. This final Tier One EIS considers a No Action Alternative, which includes currently funded projects, and two build alternatives. Alternative 203, which is the preferred alternative, would consist of upgrading and extending the Elgin OHare Expressway between IL 19/Gary Avenue to the OHare West Bypass for about 10 miles. Between IL 19/Gary Avenue and I-290, the expressway would be widened and upgraded along the existing alignment. East of I-290, extending to the West Bypass and the proposed OHare West Terminal, Thorndale Road would be upgraded to a new full-access control freeway. Alternative 203 also includes the OHare West Bypass, a freeway section that would extend from I-90, south along the western edge of OHare Airport to the Bensenville Yard. The bypass would then tunnel under and extend east along the north side of Green Street/Franklin Avenue before turning south to connect with I-294. South Bypass Connection Option D was identified as the preferred alignment for connecting to I-294 beginning at the tunnel under the Bensenville Yard. The freeway would extend southeast along the north edge of Green Street, then cross the Union Pacific Railroad and proceed south, paralleling the east side of the railroad, to a new system connection with I-294 near Grand Avenue. A new bridge that reconnects Taft Road across the Bensenville Yard, linking Franklin Avenue and IL 19 would be constructed, and a full access system interchange would be provided at I-294. The overall length of the OHare West Bypass would be 6.2 miles. The freeway would consist of four basic lanes in each direction with additional auxiliary lanes at interchanges, and a 70-foot median would accommodate transit service north of Thorndale Avenue. System interchanges are proposed at I-90, the Elgin OHare Expressway, and I-294. Service interchanges are proposed at IL 72, Devon/Pratt, the proposed OHare West Terminal, IL 19, and Green Street/Franklin Street. Improvements include a transit corridor along the J-Line west corridor from the proposed OHare West Terminal station to the Schaumburg Metra Milwaukee District West station. Another proposed transit improvement is the J-Line northwest that would extend from the Elgin OHare corridor north along IL 53 to the Woodfield Mall area. Other elements of the transit plan include extending the Chicago Transit Authority Blue Line service from OHares terminal core to the proposed OHare West Terminal, and the STAR Line rail service from the OHare West Terminal to the I-90 corridor where the service would be extended west. Express bus service is proposed on I-355, Golf Road, Dempster Street, Irving Park Road, and Mannheim Road. Shuttle bus service is proposed between the Schaumburg Metra Station and Hanover Park Metra Station. Extending the J-Line as a higher capacity transit service to the Hanover Park Metra Station will be evaluated in Tier Two. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would increase the overall system efficiency up to 10 percent, reduce congestion on secondary roads up to 15 percent, increase speed up to eight percent, and increase transit trips. The preferred alternative would directly create 9,200 jobs per year. Project investment would include added job growth totaling 21,600. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would entail loss of 39 acres of wetlands, 25 acres of floodplains, and 0.95 acres of Section 4(f) property (forest preserve and trails). Eleven homes, 28 industrial structures, 12 commercial structures, 35 businesses and 1,277 employees would be displaced. Tax revenue loss would be up to $4.47 million. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0434D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100170, 1,066 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Employment KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Watersheds KW - Wetlands KW - Illinois UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827393?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Springfield, Illinois; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 93 IMPROVEMENTS, SALEM TO MANCHESTER, HILLSBOROUGH AND ROCKINGHAM COUNTIES, NEW HAMPSHIRE (IM-IR-93-1(174)0, 10418-C) (FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF APRIL, 2004). [Part 1 of 3] T2 - INTERSTATE 93 IMPROVEMENTS, SALEM TO MANCHESTER, HILLSBOROUGH AND ROCKINGHAM COUNTIES, NEW HAMPSHIRE (IM-IR-93-1(174)0, 10418-C) (FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF APRIL, 2004). AN - 756827246; 14322-100171_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 19.8-mile segment of Interstate 93 (I-93) from the Massachusetts/New Hampshire state line northward through the towns of Salem, Windham, Derry, and Londonderry, to the I-93/I-293 interchange in the city of Manchester, New Hampshire is proposed. I-93 is principal north-south arterial within the state of New Hampshire and part of the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. Due to population growth and development, the travel demands for I-93 between Salem and Manchester have exceeded the capacity of the existing four-lane facility for a number of years. Alternatives considered in the final EIS of April, 2004 include a No-Build Alternative, transportation system management and transportation demand management alternatives, widening of the highway combined with interchange improvements, and alternative modes of transportation. The selected alternative would involve widening I-93 from the existing limited access, two-lane highway in each direction to a limited access, four-lane highway in each direction. Five existing interchanges and crossroads within the project corridor would be reconstructed. In addition, three new park-and-ride facilities would be provided, one each at exits 2, 3, and 5, and bus service and ride-sharing opportunities to Boston and northern Massachusetts would be expanded. A bike path would be integrated into the highway project and space would be reserved in the median to accommodate future commuter light rail trains. Current cost of the selected alternative is estimated at $794.4 million in future year of construction dollars. A District of New Hampshire court decision on August 30, 2007 held that traffic projections in the 2004 final EIS relied on an outdated population growth forecast. The court directed preparation of this supplemental EIS, which considers the effects of induced population and employment growth estimates on the effectiveness of the selected alternative in reducing traffic congestion, traffic on secondary roads, and air quality. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase transportation efficiency within the corridor by reducing congestion and enhancing safety. By allowing for a more efficient flow of traffic, the proposed alternative would result in decreased emissions of hydrocarbon pollutants and increased energy efficiency. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would result in the displacement of 19 residences and 23 business structures. Nine acres of important farmland soils, 77 acres of wetlands, and one state-listed protected species, the wild lupine, would be impacted. Displacements of wetland and upland areas would total 260 acres. Approximately 98 acres of stratified drift aquifer would be covered with impervious roadway surface, and the project would require lengthening culverts at many of the 21 stream crossings. Six acre-feet of floodway and 43 acre-feet of floodplain would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards, but sound walls would be provided. The project would affect 23 archaeological sites and six historically significant properties. Construction activities could encounter an estimated 13 hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 09-0315D, Volume 33, Number 3. For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 03-0086D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 04-0454F, Volume 28, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100171, 645 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NH-EIS-02-01-FS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Floodways KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Population KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - New Hampshire KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Archaeologic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827246?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+93+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+SALEM+TO+MANCHESTER%2C+HILLSBOROUGH+AND+ROCKINGHAM+COUNTIES%2C+NEW+HAMPSHIRE+%28IM-IR-93-1%28174%290%2C+10418-C%29+%28FINAL+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+APRIL%2C+2004%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+93+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+SALEM+TO+MANCHESTER%2C+HILLSBOROUGH+AND+ROCKINGHAM+COUNTIES%2C+NEW+HAMPSHIRE+%28IM-IR-93-1%28174%290%2C+10418-C%29+%28FINAL+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+APRIL%2C+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Concord, New Hampshire; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 5 of 8] T2 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756827223; 14321-100170_0005 AB - PURPOSE: A multimodal transportation concept for the Elgin O'Hare-West Bypass (EO-WB) study area in Cook and DuPage counties, Illinois is proposed. The six-county Chicago metropolitan area is home to more than nine million people, 5.1 million jobs, and a $500 billion economy. The EO-WB study area is 17 miles northwest of Chicago's central business district and is strategically located at a transportation crossroads that includes: O'Hare International Airport; a network of freeways and tollways including Interstate-90 (I-90), I-190, I-294, Elgin O'Hare Expressway and I-290; transit facilities (including Metra rail lines and Pace bus service); and freight rail service and multimodal transfer facilities. Eighteen percent of all vehicle trips in the region occur in the EO-WB study area and roughly 86 percent of the area's interstate highways and major arterials are congested with that figure projected to grow to 91 percent by 2030. Congestion on major roads will spill over to secondary roads, with 70 percent of minor arterials congested by 2030 and travel delay increasing to 52 percent. The study area comprises 127 square miles and 27 communities. This final Tier One EIS considers a No Action Alternative, which includes currently funded projects, and two build alternatives. Alternative 203, which is the preferred alternative, would consist of upgrading and extending the Elgin OHare Expressway between IL 19/Gary Avenue to the OHare West Bypass for about 10 miles. Between IL 19/Gary Avenue and I-290, the expressway would be widened and upgraded along the existing alignment. East of I-290, extending to the West Bypass and the proposed OHare West Terminal, Thorndale Road would be upgraded to a new full-access control freeway. Alternative 203 also includes the OHare West Bypass, a freeway section that would extend from I-90, south along the western edge of OHare Airport to the Bensenville Yard. The bypass would then tunnel under and extend east along the north side of Green Street/Franklin Avenue before turning south to connect with I-294. South Bypass Connection Option D was identified as the preferred alignment for connecting to I-294 beginning at the tunnel under the Bensenville Yard. The freeway would extend southeast along the north edge of Green Street, then cross the Union Pacific Railroad and proceed south, paralleling the east side of the railroad, to a new system connection with I-294 near Grand Avenue. A new bridge that reconnects Taft Road across the Bensenville Yard, linking Franklin Avenue and IL 19 would be constructed, and a full access system interchange would be provided at I-294. The overall length of the OHare West Bypass would be 6.2 miles. The freeway would consist of four basic lanes in each direction with additional auxiliary lanes at interchanges, and a 70-foot median would accommodate transit service north of Thorndale Avenue. System interchanges are proposed at I-90, the Elgin OHare Expressway, and I-294. Service interchanges are proposed at IL 72, Devon/Pratt, the proposed OHare West Terminal, IL 19, and Green Street/Franklin Street. Improvements include a transit corridor along the J-Line west corridor from the proposed OHare West Terminal station to the Schaumburg Metra Milwaukee District West station. Another proposed transit improvement is the J-Line northwest that would extend from the Elgin OHare corridor north along IL 53 to the Woodfield Mall area. Other elements of the transit plan include extending the Chicago Transit Authority Blue Line service from OHares terminal core to the proposed OHare West Terminal, and the STAR Line rail service from the OHare West Terminal to the I-90 corridor where the service would be extended west. Express bus service is proposed on I-355, Golf Road, Dempster Street, Irving Park Road, and Mannheim Road. Shuttle bus service is proposed between the Schaumburg Metra Station and Hanover Park Metra Station. Extending the J-Line as a higher capacity transit service to the Hanover Park Metra Station will be evaluated in Tier Two. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would increase the overall system efficiency up to 10 percent, reduce congestion on secondary roads up to 15 percent, increase speed up to eight percent, and increase transit trips. The preferred alternative would directly create 9,200 jobs per year. Project investment would include added job growth totaling 21,600. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would entail loss of 39 acres of wetlands, 25 acres of floodplains, and 0.95 acres of Section 4(f) property (forest preserve and trails). Eleven homes, 28 industrial structures, 12 commercial structures, 35 businesses and 1,277 employees would be displaced. Tax revenue loss would be up to $4.47 million. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0434D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100170, 1,066 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Employment KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Watersheds KW - Wetlands KW - Illinois UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827223?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Springfield, Illinois; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 4 of 8] T2 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756827214; 14321-100170_0004 AB - PURPOSE: A multimodal transportation concept for the Elgin O'Hare-West Bypass (EO-WB) study area in Cook and DuPage counties, Illinois is proposed. The six-county Chicago metropolitan area is home to more than nine million people, 5.1 million jobs, and a $500 billion economy. The EO-WB study area is 17 miles northwest of Chicago's central business district and is strategically located at a transportation crossroads that includes: O'Hare International Airport; a network of freeways and tollways including Interstate-90 (I-90), I-190, I-294, Elgin O'Hare Expressway and I-290; transit facilities (including Metra rail lines and Pace bus service); and freight rail service and multimodal transfer facilities. Eighteen percent of all vehicle trips in the region occur in the EO-WB study area and roughly 86 percent of the area's interstate highways and major arterials are congested with that figure projected to grow to 91 percent by 2030. Congestion on major roads will spill over to secondary roads, with 70 percent of minor arterials congested by 2030 and travel delay increasing to 52 percent. The study area comprises 127 square miles and 27 communities. This final Tier One EIS considers a No Action Alternative, which includes currently funded projects, and two build alternatives. Alternative 203, which is the preferred alternative, would consist of upgrading and extending the Elgin OHare Expressway between IL 19/Gary Avenue to the OHare West Bypass for about 10 miles. Between IL 19/Gary Avenue and I-290, the expressway would be widened and upgraded along the existing alignment. East of I-290, extending to the West Bypass and the proposed OHare West Terminal, Thorndale Road would be upgraded to a new full-access control freeway. Alternative 203 also includes the OHare West Bypass, a freeway section that would extend from I-90, south along the western edge of OHare Airport to the Bensenville Yard. The bypass would then tunnel under and extend east along the north side of Green Street/Franklin Avenue before turning south to connect with I-294. South Bypass Connection Option D was identified as the preferred alignment for connecting to I-294 beginning at the tunnel under the Bensenville Yard. The freeway would extend southeast along the north edge of Green Street, then cross the Union Pacific Railroad and proceed south, paralleling the east side of the railroad, to a new system connection with I-294 near Grand Avenue. A new bridge that reconnects Taft Road across the Bensenville Yard, linking Franklin Avenue and IL 19 would be constructed, and a full access system interchange would be provided at I-294. The overall length of the OHare West Bypass would be 6.2 miles. The freeway would consist of four basic lanes in each direction with additional auxiliary lanes at interchanges, and a 70-foot median would accommodate transit service north of Thorndale Avenue. System interchanges are proposed at I-90, the Elgin OHare Expressway, and I-294. Service interchanges are proposed at IL 72, Devon/Pratt, the proposed OHare West Terminal, IL 19, and Green Street/Franklin Street. Improvements include a transit corridor along the J-Line west corridor from the proposed OHare West Terminal station to the Schaumburg Metra Milwaukee District West station. Another proposed transit improvement is the J-Line northwest that would extend from the Elgin OHare corridor north along IL 53 to the Woodfield Mall area. Other elements of the transit plan include extending the Chicago Transit Authority Blue Line service from OHares terminal core to the proposed OHare West Terminal, and the STAR Line rail service from the OHare West Terminal to the I-90 corridor where the service would be extended west. Express bus service is proposed on I-355, Golf Road, Dempster Street, Irving Park Road, and Mannheim Road. Shuttle bus service is proposed between the Schaumburg Metra Station and Hanover Park Metra Station. Extending the J-Line as a higher capacity transit service to the Hanover Park Metra Station will be evaluated in Tier Two. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would increase the overall system efficiency up to 10 percent, reduce congestion on secondary roads up to 15 percent, increase speed up to eight percent, and increase transit trips. The preferred alternative would directly create 9,200 jobs per year. Project investment would include added job growth totaling 21,600. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would entail loss of 39 acres of wetlands, 25 acres of floodplains, and 0.95 acres of Section 4(f) property (forest preserve and trails). Eleven homes, 28 industrial structures, 12 commercial structures, 35 businesses and 1,277 employees would be displaced. Tax revenue loss would be up to $4.47 million. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0434D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100170, 1,066 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Employment KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Watersheds KW - Wetlands KW - Illinois UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827214?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Springfield, Illinois; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 3 of 8] T2 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756827205; 14321-100170_0003 AB - PURPOSE: A multimodal transportation concept for the Elgin O'Hare-West Bypass (EO-WB) study area in Cook and DuPage counties, Illinois is proposed. The six-county Chicago metropolitan area is home to more than nine million people, 5.1 million jobs, and a $500 billion economy. The EO-WB study area is 17 miles northwest of Chicago's central business district and is strategically located at a transportation crossroads that includes: O'Hare International Airport; a network of freeways and tollways including Interstate-90 (I-90), I-190, I-294, Elgin O'Hare Expressway and I-290; transit facilities (including Metra rail lines and Pace bus service); and freight rail service and multimodal transfer facilities. Eighteen percent of all vehicle trips in the region occur in the EO-WB study area and roughly 86 percent of the area's interstate highways and major arterials are congested with that figure projected to grow to 91 percent by 2030. Congestion on major roads will spill over to secondary roads, with 70 percent of minor arterials congested by 2030 and travel delay increasing to 52 percent. The study area comprises 127 square miles and 27 communities. This final Tier One EIS considers a No Action Alternative, which includes currently funded projects, and two build alternatives. Alternative 203, which is the preferred alternative, would consist of upgrading and extending the Elgin OHare Expressway between IL 19/Gary Avenue to the OHare West Bypass for about 10 miles. Between IL 19/Gary Avenue and I-290, the expressway would be widened and upgraded along the existing alignment. East of I-290, extending to the West Bypass and the proposed OHare West Terminal, Thorndale Road would be upgraded to a new full-access control freeway. Alternative 203 also includes the OHare West Bypass, a freeway section that would extend from I-90, south along the western edge of OHare Airport to the Bensenville Yard. The bypass would then tunnel under and extend east along the north side of Green Street/Franklin Avenue before turning south to connect with I-294. South Bypass Connection Option D was identified as the preferred alignment for connecting to I-294 beginning at the tunnel under the Bensenville Yard. The freeway would extend southeast along the north edge of Green Street, then cross the Union Pacific Railroad and proceed south, paralleling the east side of the railroad, to a new system connection with I-294 near Grand Avenue. A new bridge that reconnects Taft Road across the Bensenville Yard, linking Franklin Avenue and IL 19 would be constructed, and a full access system interchange would be provided at I-294. The overall length of the OHare West Bypass would be 6.2 miles. The freeway would consist of four basic lanes in each direction with additional auxiliary lanes at interchanges, and a 70-foot median would accommodate transit service north of Thorndale Avenue. System interchanges are proposed at I-90, the Elgin OHare Expressway, and I-294. Service interchanges are proposed at IL 72, Devon/Pratt, the proposed OHare West Terminal, IL 19, and Green Street/Franklin Street. Improvements include a transit corridor along the J-Line west corridor from the proposed OHare West Terminal station to the Schaumburg Metra Milwaukee District West station. Another proposed transit improvement is the J-Line northwest that would extend from the Elgin OHare corridor north along IL 53 to the Woodfield Mall area. Other elements of the transit plan include extending the Chicago Transit Authority Blue Line service from OHares terminal core to the proposed OHare West Terminal, and the STAR Line rail service from the OHare West Terminal to the I-90 corridor where the service would be extended west. Express bus service is proposed on I-355, Golf Road, Dempster Street, Irving Park Road, and Mannheim Road. Shuttle bus service is proposed between the Schaumburg Metra Station and Hanover Park Metra Station. Extending the J-Line as a higher capacity transit service to the Hanover Park Metra Station will be evaluated in Tier Two. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would increase the overall system efficiency up to 10 percent, reduce congestion on secondary roads up to 15 percent, increase speed up to eight percent, and increase transit trips. The preferred alternative would directly create 9,200 jobs per year. Project investment would include added job growth totaling 21,600. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would entail loss of 39 acres of wetlands, 25 acres of floodplains, and 0.95 acres of Section 4(f) property (forest preserve and trails). Eleven homes, 28 industrial structures, 12 commercial structures, 35 businesses and 1,277 employees would be displaced. Tax revenue loss would be up to $4.47 million. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0434D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100170, 1,066 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Employment KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Watersheds KW - Wetlands KW - Illinois UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827205?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Springfield, Illinois; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 8 of 8] T2 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756827131; 14321-100170_0008 AB - PURPOSE: A multimodal transportation concept for the Elgin O'Hare-West Bypass (EO-WB) study area in Cook and DuPage counties, Illinois is proposed. The six-county Chicago metropolitan area is home to more than nine million people, 5.1 million jobs, and a $500 billion economy. The EO-WB study area is 17 miles northwest of Chicago's central business district and is strategically located at a transportation crossroads that includes: O'Hare International Airport; a network of freeways and tollways including Interstate-90 (I-90), I-190, I-294, Elgin O'Hare Expressway and I-290; transit facilities (including Metra rail lines and Pace bus service); and freight rail service and multimodal transfer facilities. Eighteen percent of all vehicle trips in the region occur in the EO-WB study area and roughly 86 percent of the area's interstate highways and major arterials are congested with that figure projected to grow to 91 percent by 2030. Congestion on major roads will spill over to secondary roads, with 70 percent of minor arterials congested by 2030 and travel delay increasing to 52 percent. The study area comprises 127 square miles and 27 communities. This final Tier One EIS considers a No Action Alternative, which includes currently funded projects, and two build alternatives. Alternative 203, which is the preferred alternative, would consist of upgrading and extending the Elgin OHare Expressway between IL 19/Gary Avenue to the OHare West Bypass for about 10 miles. Between IL 19/Gary Avenue and I-290, the expressway would be widened and upgraded along the existing alignment. East of I-290, extending to the West Bypass and the proposed OHare West Terminal, Thorndale Road would be upgraded to a new full-access control freeway. Alternative 203 also includes the OHare West Bypass, a freeway section that would extend from I-90, south along the western edge of OHare Airport to the Bensenville Yard. The bypass would then tunnel under and extend east along the north side of Green Street/Franklin Avenue before turning south to connect with I-294. South Bypass Connection Option D was identified as the preferred alignment for connecting to I-294 beginning at the tunnel under the Bensenville Yard. The freeway would extend southeast along the north edge of Green Street, then cross the Union Pacific Railroad and proceed south, paralleling the east side of the railroad, to a new system connection with I-294 near Grand Avenue. A new bridge that reconnects Taft Road across the Bensenville Yard, linking Franklin Avenue and IL 19 would be constructed, and a full access system interchange would be provided at I-294. The overall length of the OHare West Bypass would be 6.2 miles. The freeway would consist of four basic lanes in each direction with additional auxiliary lanes at interchanges, and a 70-foot median would accommodate transit service north of Thorndale Avenue. System interchanges are proposed at I-90, the Elgin OHare Expressway, and I-294. Service interchanges are proposed at IL 72, Devon/Pratt, the proposed OHare West Terminal, IL 19, and Green Street/Franklin Street. Improvements include a transit corridor along the J-Line west corridor from the proposed OHare West Terminal station to the Schaumburg Metra Milwaukee District West station. Another proposed transit improvement is the J-Line northwest that would extend from the Elgin OHare corridor north along IL 53 to the Woodfield Mall area. Other elements of the transit plan include extending the Chicago Transit Authority Blue Line service from OHares terminal core to the proposed OHare West Terminal, and the STAR Line rail service from the OHare West Terminal to the I-90 corridor where the service would be extended west. Express bus service is proposed on I-355, Golf Road, Dempster Street, Irving Park Road, and Mannheim Road. Shuttle bus service is proposed between the Schaumburg Metra Station and Hanover Park Metra Station. Extending the J-Line as a higher capacity transit service to the Hanover Park Metra Station will be evaluated in Tier Two. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would increase the overall system efficiency up to 10 percent, reduce congestion on secondary roads up to 15 percent, increase speed up to eight percent, and increase transit trips. The preferred alternative would directly create 9,200 jobs per year. Project investment would include added job growth totaling 21,600. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would entail loss of 39 acres of wetlands, 25 acres of floodplains, and 0.95 acres of Section 4(f) property (forest preserve and trails). Eleven homes, 28 industrial structures, 12 commercial structures, 35 businesses and 1,277 employees would be displaced. Tax revenue loss would be up to $4.47 million. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0434D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100170, 1,066 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Employment KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Watersheds KW - Wetlands KW - Illinois UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827131?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Springfield, Illinois; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 93 IMPROVEMENTS, SALEM TO MANCHESTER, HILLSBOROUGH AND ROCKINGHAM COUNTIES, NEW HAMPSHIRE (IM-IR-93-1(174)0, 10418-C) (FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF APRIL, 2004). [Part 2 of 3] T2 - INTERSTATE 93 IMPROVEMENTS, SALEM TO MANCHESTER, HILLSBOROUGH AND ROCKINGHAM COUNTIES, NEW HAMPSHIRE (IM-IR-93-1(174)0, 10418-C) (FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF APRIL, 2004). AN - 756827110; 14322-100171_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 19.8-mile segment of Interstate 93 (I-93) from the Massachusetts/New Hampshire state line northward through the towns of Salem, Windham, Derry, and Londonderry, to the I-93/I-293 interchange in the city of Manchester, New Hampshire is proposed. I-93 is principal north-south arterial within the state of New Hampshire and part of the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. Due to population growth and development, the travel demands for I-93 between Salem and Manchester have exceeded the capacity of the existing four-lane facility for a number of years. Alternatives considered in the final EIS of April, 2004 include a No-Build Alternative, transportation system management and transportation demand management alternatives, widening of the highway combined with interchange improvements, and alternative modes of transportation. The selected alternative would involve widening I-93 from the existing limited access, two-lane highway in each direction to a limited access, four-lane highway in each direction. Five existing interchanges and crossroads within the project corridor would be reconstructed. In addition, three new park-and-ride facilities would be provided, one each at exits 2, 3, and 5, and bus service and ride-sharing opportunities to Boston and northern Massachusetts would be expanded. A bike path would be integrated into the highway project and space would be reserved in the median to accommodate future commuter light rail trains. Current cost of the selected alternative is estimated at $794.4 million in future year of construction dollars. A District of New Hampshire court decision on August 30, 2007 held that traffic projections in the 2004 final EIS relied on an outdated population growth forecast. The court directed preparation of this supplemental EIS, which considers the effects of induced population and employment growth estimates on the effectiveness of the selected alternative in reducing traffic congestion, traffic on secondary roads, and air quality. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase transportation efficiency within the corridor by reducing congestion and enhancing safety. By allowing for a more efficient flow of traffic, the proposed alternative would result in decreased emissions of hydrocarbon pollutants and increased energy efficiency. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would result in the displacement of 19 residences and 23 business structures. Nine acres of important farmland soils, 77 acres of wetlands, and one state-listed protected species, the wild lupine, would be impacted. Displacements of wetland and upland areas would total 260 acres. Approximately 98 acres of stratified drift aquifer would be covered with impervious roadway surface, and the project would require lengthening culverts at many of the 21 stream crossings. Six acre-feet of floodway and 43 acre-feet of floodplain would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards, but sound walls would be provided. The project would affect 23 archaeological sites and six historically significant properties. Construction activities could encounter an estimated 13 hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 09-0315D, Volume 33, Number 3. For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 03-0086D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 04-0454F, Volume 28, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100171, 645 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NH-EIS-02-01-FS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Floodways KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Population KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - New Hampshire KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Archaeologic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827110?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+93+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+SALEM+TO+MANCHESTER%2C+HILLSBOROUGH+AND+ROCKINGHAM+COUNTIES%2C+NEW+HAMPSHIRE+%28IM-IR-93-1%28174%290%2C+10418-C%29+%28FINAL+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+APRIL%2C+2004%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+93+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+SALEM+TO+MANCHESTER%2C+HILLSBOROUGH+AND+ROCKINGHAM+COUNTIES%2C+NEW+HAMPSHIRE+%28IM-IR-93-1%28174%290%2C+10418-C%29+%28FINAL+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+APRIL%2C+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Concord, New Hampshire; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 93 IMPROVEMENTS, SALEM TO MANCHESTER, HILLSBOROUGH AND ROCKINGHAM COUNTIES, NEW HAMPSHIRE (IM-IR-93-1(174)0, 10418-C) (FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF APRIL, 2004). AN - 16372282; 14322 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 19.8-mile segment of Interstate 93 (I-93) from the Massachusetts/New Hampshire state line northward through the towns of Salem, Windham, Derry, and Londonderry, to the I-93/I-293 interchange in the city of Manchester, New Hampshire is proposed. I-93 is principal north-south arterial within the state of New Hampshire and part of the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. Due to population growth and development, the travel demands for I-93 between Salem and Manchester have exceeded the capacity of the existing four-lane facility for a number of years. Alternatives considered in the final EIS of April, 2004 include a No-Build Alternative, transportation system management and transportation demand management alternatives, widening of the highway combined with interchange improvements, and alternative modes of transportation. The selected alternative would involve widening I-93 from the existing limited access, two-lane highway in each direction to a limited access, four-lane highway in each direction. Five existing interchanges and crossroads within the project corridor would be reconstructed. In addition, three new park-and-ride facilities would be provided, one each at exits 2, 3, and 5, and bus service and ride-sharing opportunities to Boston and northern Massachusetts would be expanded. A bike path would be integrated into the highway project and space would be reserved in the median to accommodate future commuter light rail trains. Current cost of the selected alternative is estimated at $794.4 million in future year of construction dollars. A District of New Hampshire court decision on August 30, 2007 held that traffic projections in the 2004 final EIS relied on an outdated population growth forecast. The court directed preparation of this supplemental EIS, which considers the effects of induced population and employment growth estimates on the effectiveness of the selected alternative in reducing traffic congestion, traffic on secondary roads, and air quality. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase transportation efficiency within the corridor by reducing congestion and enhancing safety. By allowing for a more efficient flow of traffic, the proposed alternative would result in decreased emissions of hydrocarbon pollutants and increased energy efficiency. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would result in the displacement of 19 residences and 23 business structures. Nine acres of important farmland soils, 77 acres of wetlands, and one state-listed protected species, the wild lupine, would be impacted. Displacements of wetland and upland areas would total 260 acres. Approximately 98 acres of stratified drift aquifer would be covered with impervious roadway surface, and the project would require lengthening culverts at many of the 21 stream crossings. Six acre-feet of floodway and 43 acre-feet of floodplain would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards, but sound walls would be provided. The project would affect 23 archaeological sites and six historically significant properties. Construction activities could encounter an estimated 13 hazardous material sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 09-0315D, Volume 33, Number 3. For the abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 03-0086D, Volume 27, Number 1 and 04-0454F, Volume 28, Number 4, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100171, 645 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NH-EIS-02-01-FS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Employment KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Floodways KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Population KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - New Hampshire KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Archaeologic Sites KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16372282?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+93+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+SALEM+TO+MANCHESTER%2C+HILLSBOROUGH+AND+ROCKINGHAM+COUNTIES%2C+NEW+HAMPSHIRE+%28IM-IR-93-1%28174%290%2C+10418-C%29+%28FINAL+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+APRIL%2C+2004%29.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+93+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+SALEM+TO+MANCHESTER%2C+HILLSBOROUGH+AND+ROCKINGHAM+COUNTIES%2C+NEW+HAMPSHIRE+%28IM-IR-93-1%28174%290%2C+10418-C%29+%28FINAL+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+APRIL%2C+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Concord, New Hampshire; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ELGIN O'HARE - WEST BYPASS PROJECT, COOK AND DUPAGE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS (TIER 1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 15225139; 14321 AB - PURPOSE: A multimodal transportation concept for the Elgin O'Hare-West Bypass (EO-WB) study area in Cook and DuPage counties, Illinois is proposed. The six-county Chicago metropolitan area is home to more than nine million people, 5.1 million jobs, and a $500 billion economy. The EO-WB study area is 17 miles northwest of Chicago's central business district and is strategically located at a transportation crossroads that includes: O'Hare International Airport; a network of freeways and tollways including Interstate-90 (I-90), I-190, I-294, Elgin O'Hare Expressway and I-290; transit facilities (including Metra rail lines and Pace bus service); and freight rail service and multimodal transfer facilities. Eighteen percent of all vehicle trips in the region occur in the EO-WB study area and roughly 86 percent of the area's interstate highways and major arterials are congested with that figure projected to grow to 91 percent by 2030. Congestion on major roads will spill over to secondary roads, with 70 percent of minor arterials congested by 2030 and travel delay increasing to 52 percent. The study area comprises 127 square miles and 27 communities. This final Tier One EIS considers a No Action Alternative, which includes currently funded projects, and two build alternatives. Alternative 203, which is the preferred alternative, would consist of upgrading and extending the Elgin OHare Expressway between IL 19/Gary Avenue to the OHare West Bypass for about 10 miles. Between IL 19/Gary Avenue and I-290, the expressway would be widened and upgraded along the existing alignment. East of I-290, extending to the West Bypass and the proposed OHare West Terminal, Thorndale Road would be upgraded to a new full-access control freeway. Alternative 203 also includes the OHare West Bypass, a freeway section that would extend from I-90, south along the western edge of OHare Airport to the Bensenville Yard. The bypass would then tunnel under and extend east along the north side of Green Street/Franklin Avenue before turning south to connect with I-294. South Bypass Connection Option D was identified as the preferred alignment for connecting to I-294 beginning at the tunnel under the Bensenville Yard. The freeway would extend southeast along the north edge of Green Street, then cross the Union Pacific Railroad and proceed south, paralleling the east side of the railroad, to a new system connection with I-294 near Grand Avenue. A new bridge that reconnects Taft Road across the Bensenville Yard, linking Franklin Avenue and IL 19 would be constructed, and a full access system interchange would be provided at I-294. The overall length of the OHare West Bypass would be 6.2 miles. The freeway would consist of four basic lanes in each direction with additional auxiliary lanes at interchanges, and a 70-foot median would accommodate transit service north of Thorndale Avenue. System interchanges are proposed at I-90, the Elgin OHare Expressway, and I-294. Service interchanges are proposed at IL 72, Devon/Pratt, the proposed OHare West Terminal, IL 19, and Green Street/Franklin Street. Improvements include a transit corridor along the J-Line west corridor from the proposed OHare West Terminal station to the Schaumburg Metra Milwaukee District West station. Another proposed transit improvement is the J-Line northwest that would extend from the Elgin OHare corridor north along IL 53 to the Woodfield Mall area. Other elements of the transit plan include extending the Chicago Transit Authority Blue Line service from OHares terminal core to the proposed OHare West Terminal, and the STAR Line rail service from the OHare West Terminal to the I-90 corridor where the service would be extended west. Express bus service is proposed on I-355, Golf Road, Dempster Street, Irving Park Road, and Mannheim Road. Shuttle bus service is proposed between the Schaumburg Metra Station and Hanover Park Metra Station. Extending the J-Line as a higher capacity transit service to the Hanover Park Metra Station will be evaluated in Tier Two. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would increase the overall system efficiency up to 10 percent, reduce congestion on secondary roads up to 15 percent, increase speed up to eight percent, and increase transit trips. The preferred alternative would directly create 9,200 jobs per year. Project investment would include added job growth totaling 21,600. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would entail loss of 39 acres of wetlands, 25 acres of floodplains, and 0.95 acres of Section 4(f) property (forest preserve and trails). Eleven homes, 28 industrial structures, 12 commercial structures, 35 businesses and 1,277 employees would be displaced. Tax revenue loss would be up to $4.47 million. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0434D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100170, 1,066 pages and maps, May 6, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Airports KW - Employment KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Watersheds KW - Wetlands KW - Illinois UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/15225139?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-05-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=ELGIN+O%27HARE+-+WEST+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+COOK+AND+DUPAGE+COUNTIES%2C+ILLINOIS+%28TIER+1+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Springfield, Illinois; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: May 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - The competition game on hub network design AN - 918038978; 13022234 AB - In a competitive market, carriers in network industries design their hub networks and operations plans to maximize their respective profits. The long-term Cournot-Nash equilibrium steady state requires that none of the carriers may unilaterally alternate their hub networks or operations plans to increase profits. We study an integral-constrained game theoretic model for time-definite less-than-truckload freight services in an oligopolistic market. The research showed that carriers favor geographic central than outlying hub locations. With price-elastic demand in the freight market, the higher the network density is, the higher the profit is. Thus, the stable Cournot-Nash equilibrium solution states that all carriers respectively possess a similarly dense hub network, which is robust even with uneven changes in carrier cost structures. However, there is a prorogation effect in that an operating cost reduction will increase the individual carrier's and also the competitors' profits. The results also showed that there are cooperative equilibria that can make all carriers better off, but are unstable solutions in the non-cooperative game. JF - Transportation Research, Part B AU - Lin, Cheng-Chang AU - Lee, Shwu-Chiou AD - Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, 1 University Road, Tainan, Taiwan, cclin@mail.ncku.edu.tw Y1 - 2010/05// PY - 2010 DA - May 2010 SP - 618 EP - 629 PB - Elsevier Science, P.O. Box 800 Kidlington Oxford OX5 1DX UK VL - 44 IS - 4 SN - 0191-2615, 0191-2615 KW - Environment Abstracts KW - Hub-and-spoke network KW - Game theory KW - Cournota"Nash equilibrium KW - Less-than-truckload freight services KW - Transportation KW - cooperatives KW - operating costs KW - profits KW - Design KW - game theory KW - competition KW - ENA 18:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/918038978?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvabstractsmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research%2C+Part+B&rft.atitle=The+competition+game+on+hub+network+design&rft.au=Lin%2C+Cheng-Chang%3BLee%2C+Shwu-Chiou&rft.aulast=Lin&rft.aufirst=Cheng-Chang&rft.date=2010-05-01&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=618&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research%2C+Part+B&rft.issn=01912615&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.trb.2009.09.002 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-10-15 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Transportation; cooperatives; operating costs; competition; game theory; Design; profits DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2009.09.002 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Reliability-based calibration of resistance factors for static bearing capacity of driven steel pipe piles AN - 853220356; 2011-019149 AB - As part of a study to develop load and resistance factor design (LRFD) codes for foundation structures in South Korea, resistance factors for the static bearing capacity of driven steel pipe piles were calibrated in the framework of the reliability theory. A database of 52 static load test results was compiled, and the data from these load test piles were sorted into two cases: a standard penetration test (SPT) N-value at pile tip (i) less than 50 and (ii) equal to or more than 50. Reliability analyses and resistance factor calibration for the two static bearing capacity analysis methods adopted in the Korean Design standards for foundation structures were performed using the first-order reliability method (FORM) and the Monte Carlo simulation (MCS). Reliability indices and resistance factors computed by the MCS are statistically identical to those computed by FORM. Target reliability indices were selected as 2.0 and 2.33 for the group pile case and 2.5 for the single pile case. The resistance factors recommended from this study are specific for the pile foundation design and construction practice and the subsurface conditions in South Korea. JF - Canadian Geotechnical Journal = Revue Canadienne de Geotechnique AU - Kwak, Kiseok AU - Kim, Kyung Jun AU - Huh, Jungwon AU - Lee, Ju Hyung AU - Park, Jae Hyun Y1 - 2010/05// PY - 2010 DA - May 2010 SP - 528 EP - 538 PB - National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, ON VL - 47 IS - 5 SN - 0008-3674, 0008-3674 KW - first-order reliability method KW - resistance factor design KW - Far East KW - penetration tests KW - bearing capacity KW - Monte Carlo analysis KW - cone penetration tests KW - statistical analysis KW - reliability KW - data processing KW - calibration KW - Korea KW - simulation KW - foundations KW - building codes KW - data bases KW - load tests KW - piles KW - Asia KW - construction KW - design KW - South Korea KW - 30:Engineering geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853220356?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Canadian+Geotechnical+Journal+%3D+Revue+Canadienne+de+Geotechnique&rft.atitle=Reliability-based+calibration+of+resistance+factors+for+static+bearing+capacity+of+driven+steel+pipe+piles&rft.au=Kwak%2C+Kiseok%3BKim%2C+Kyung+Jun%3BHuh%2C+Jungwon%3BLee%2C+Ju+Hyung%3BPark%2C+Jae+Hyun&rft.aulast=Kwak&rft.aufirst=Kiseok&rft.date=2010-05-01&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=528&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Canadian+Geotechnical+Journal+%3D+Revue+Canadienne+de+Geotechnique&rft.issn=00083674&rft_id=info:doi/10.1139%2FT09-119 L2 - http://pubs.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/rp-ps/journalDetail.jsp?jcode=cgj&lang=eng LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 21 N1 - PubXState - ON N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 8 tables N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - CGJOAH N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Asia; bearing capacity; building codes; calibration; cone penetration tests; construction; data bases; data processing; design; Far East; first-order reliability method; foundations; Korea; load tests; Monte Carlo analysis; penetration tests; piles; reliability; resistance factor design; simulation; South Korea; statistical analysis DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/T09-119 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Postmortem Aviation Forensic Toxicology: An Overview AN - 744626950; 13153805 AB - An overview of the subtopic aviation combustion toxicology of the field of aerospace toxicology has been published. In a continuation of the overview, the findings associated with postmortem aviation forensic toxicology are being summarized in the present overview. A literature search for the period of 1960-2007 was performed. The important findings related to postmortem toxicology were evaluated. In addition to a brief introduction, this overview is divided into the sections of analytical methods; carboxyhemoglobin and blood cyanide ion; ethanol; drugs; result interpretation; glucose and hemoglobin A1c; and references. Specific details of the subject matter were discussed. It is anticipated that this overview will be an outline source for aviation forensic toxicology within the field of aerospace toxicology. JF - Journal of Analytical Toxicology AU - Chaturvedi, Arvind K AD - Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory (AAM-610), Aerospace Medical Research Division, Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125-5066 Y1 - 2010/05// PY - 2010 DA - May 2010 SP - 169 EP - 176 PB - Preston Publications, Inc., 6600 W. Touhy Ave. Niles IL 60714 USA VL - 34 IS - 4 SN - 0146-4760, 0146-4760 KW - Toxicology Abstracts KW - Hemoglobin KW - Blood KW - Cyanide KW - Reviews KW - Forensic science KW - Carboxyhemoglobin KW - Glucose KW - Drug abuse KW - Combustion KW - Ethanol KW - X 24300:Methods UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/744626950?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Atoxicologyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Analytical+Toxicology&rft.atitle=Postmortem+Aviation+Forensic+Toxicology%3A+An+Overview&rft.au=Chaturvedi%2C+Arvind+K&rft.aulast=Chaturvedi&rft.aufirst=Arvind&rft.date=2010-05-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=169&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Analytical+Toxicology&rft.issn=01464760&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/pres/jat/2010/00000034/00000004/art00001 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-01 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-29 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Hemoglobin; Blood; Cyanide; Reviews; Glucose; Carboxyhemoglobin; Forensic science; Drug abuse; Ethanol; Combustion ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CONWAY WESTERN ARTERIAL LOOP, FAULKNER COUNTY, ARKANSAS. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - CONWAY WESTERN ARTERIAL LOOP, FAULKNER COUNTY, ARKANSAS. AN - 756827429; 14318-100167_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a western arterial loop on the south and west sides of Conway in Faulkner County, Arkansas is proposed. The Conway Western Arterial Loop would connect to Interstate 40 (I-40) on the northwest side of Conway, extend to the south through the west side of Conway, turn east across the south side of Conway, and reconnect to I-40 on the south side of Conway. Conway is located 25 miles northwest of Little Rock and is the most populated city in Faulkner County, constituting part of the Little Rock Metropolitan Statistical Area. Over the past decade, Conway has grown dramatically and has emerged as a strong satellite community in the Little Rock area. Four alternative alignments and a No Action Alternative are presented in this final EIS. Under Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, the loop would be a four-lane arterial with a non-transversable median in non-urban areas. Access would be limited to intersections with selected crossing streets as established by an access management plan to be prepared as a part of this action. No adjacent property access would be provided within the non-urban section of the alignment. The roadway design would have at-grade intersections with existing arterial routes in Conway and controlled access interchanges at the north and south intersections with I-40. The roadway design would have sidewalks throughout the urban areas. In rural areas, particularly in the Round Mountain area, the facility would feature a divided parkway section with independent geometry on the separate roadways. Project planning, design, engineering, and right-of-way acquisition is anticipated to take five years, with an additional five years necessary for construction of the proposed roadway. The entire loop is currently anticipated to be complete by 2020. Because of funding limitations and forecasts of variable travel demands within the area the project may be constructed in stages, possibly completing some sections as two-lane roadways to be later expanded to the proposed four-lane design or completing high demand sections first with intermediate connections completed as demand requires. The implementation plan is to commence construction on the southern portion of the loop by the year 2011. The cost for complete build out of the preferred alternative is estimated at $155 million in 2009 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed freeway would provide additional arterial route capacity for western Conway and the southwestern corner of Faulkner County. Traffic using this alternative route would be diverted from the existing arterial routes connecting western Conway to I-40, resulting in a reduction of traffic congestion and an improvement in safety conditions on those arterial routes. The diversion of traffic would also relieve congestion at the existing interchanges connecting to I-40 in Conway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway would traverse 50 acres of floodplain and displace 122 acres of forest, 0.3 acres of wetlands, and 48.9 acres of pasture. The highway would traverse seven hazardous materials sites. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of two sensitive receptor sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 04-0339D, Volume 28, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100167, 659 pages and maps, April 30, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AR-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Ranges KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Arkansas KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827429?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-30&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CONWAY+WESTERN+ARTERIAL+LOOP%2C+FAULKNER+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.title=CONWAY+WESTERN+ARTERIAL+LOOP%2C+FAULKNER+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Little Rock, Arkansas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 30, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CONWAY WESTERN ARTERIAL LOOP, FAULKNER COUNTY, ARKANSAS. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - CONWAY WESTERN ARTERIAL LOOP, FAULKNER COUNTY, ARKANSAS. AN - 756827122; 14318-100167_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a western arterial loop on the south and west sides of Conway in Faulkner County, Arkansas is proposed. The Conway Western Arterial Loop would connect to Interstate 40 (I-40) on the northwest side of Conway, extend to the south through the west side of Conway, turn east across the south side of Conway, and reconnect to I-40 on the south side of Conway. Conway is located 25 miles northwest of Little Rock and is the most populated city in Faulkner County, constituting part of the Little Rock Metropolitan Statistical Area. Over the past decade, Conway has grown dramatically and has emerged as a strong satellite community in the Little Rock area. Four alternative alignments and a No Action Alternative are presented in this final EIS. Under Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, the loop would be a four-lane arterial with a non-transversable median in non-urban areas. Access would be limited to intersections with selected crossing streets as established by an access management plan to be prepared as a part of this action. No adjacent property access would be provided within the non-urban section of the alignment. The roadway design would have at-grade intersections with existing arterial routes in Conway and controlled access interchanges at the north and south intersections with I-40. The roadway design would have sidewalks throughout the urban areas. In rural areas, particularly in the Round Mountain area, the facility would feature a divided parkway section with independent geometry on the separate roadways. Project planning, design, engineering, and right-of-way acquisition is anticipated to take five years, with an additional five years necessary for construction of the proposed roadway. The entire loop is currently anticipated to be complete by 2020. Because of funding limitations and forecasts of variable travel demands within the area the project may be constructed in stages, possibly completing some sections as two-lane roadways to be later expanded to the proposed four-lane design or completing high demand sections first with intermediate connections completed as demand requires. The implementation plan is to commence construction on the southern portion of the loop by the year 2011. The cost for complete build out of the preferred alternative is estimated at $155 million in 2009 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed freeway would provide additional arterial route capacity for western Conway and the southwestern corner of Faulkner County. Traffic using this alternative route would be diverted from the existing arterial routes connecting western Conway to I-40, resulting in a reduction of traffic congestion and an improvement in safety conditions on those arterial routes. The diversion of traffic would also relieve congestion at the existing interchanges connecting to I-40 in Conway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway would traverse 50 acres of floodplain and displace 122 acres of forest, 0.3 acres of wetlands, and 48.9 acres of pasture. The highway would traverse seven hazardous materials sites. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of two sensitive receptor sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 04-0339D, Volume 28, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100167, 659 pages and maps, April 30, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AR-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Ranges KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Arkansas KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827122?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-30&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CONWAY+WESTERN+ARTERIAL+LOOP%2C+FAULKNER+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.title=CONWAY+WESTERN+ARTERIAL+LOOP%2C+FAULKNER+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Little Rock, Arkansas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 30, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CONWAY WESTERN ARTERIAL LOOP, FAULKNER COUNTY, ARKANSAS. AN - 15226375; 14318 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a western arterial loop on the south and west sides of Conway in Faulkner County, Arkansas is proposed. The Conway Western Arterial Loop would connect to Interstate 40 (I-40) on the northwest side of Conway, extend to the south through the west side of Conway, turn east across the south side of Conway, and reconnect to I-40 on the south side of Conway. Conway is located 25 miles northwest of Little Rock and is the most populated city in Faulkner County, constituting part of the Little Rock Metropolitan Statistical Area. Over the past decade, Conway has grown dramatically and has emerged as a strong satellite community in the Little Rock area. Four alternative alignments and a No Action Alternative are presented in this final EIS. Under Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, the loop would be a four-lane arterial with a non-transversable median in non-urban areas. Access would be limited to intersections with selected crossing streets as established by an access management plan to be prepared as a part of this action. No adjacent property access would be provided within the non-urban section of the alignment. The roadway design would have at-grade intersections with existing arterial routes in Conway and controlled access interchanges at the north and south intersections with I-40. The roadway design would have sidewalks throughout the urban areas. In rural areas, particularly in the Round Mountain area, the facility would feature a divided parkway section with independent geometry on the separate roadways. Project planning, design, engineering, and right-of-way acquisition is anticipated to take five years, with an additional five years necessary for construction of the proposed roadway. The entire loop is currently anticipated to be complete by 2020. Because of funding limitations and forecasts of variable travel demands within the area the project may be constructed in stages, possibly completing some sections as two-lane roadways to be later expanded to the proposed four-lane design or completing high demand sections first with intermediate connections completed as demand requires. The implementation plan is to commence construction on the southern portion of the loop by the year 2011. The cost for complete build out of the preferred alternative is estimated at $155 million in 2009 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed freeway would provide additional arterial route capacity for western Conway and the southwestern corner of Faulkner County. Traffic using this alternative route would be diverted from the existing arterial routes connecting western Conway to I-40, resulting in a reduction of traffic congestion and an improvement in safety conditions on those arterial routes. The diversion of traffic would also relieve congestion at the existing interchanges connecting to I-40 in Conway. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The freeway would traverse 50 acres of floodplain and displace 122 acres of forest, 0.3 acres of wetlands, and 48.9 acres of pasture. The highway would traverse seven hazardous materials sites. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of two sensitive receptor sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 04-0339D, Volume 28, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100167, 659 pages and maps, April 30, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AR-EIS-10-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Ranges KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Arkansas KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/15226375?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-30&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CONWAY+WESTERN+ARTERIAL+LOOP%2C+FAULKNER+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.title=CONWAY+WESTERN+ARTERIAL+LOOP%2C+FAULKNER+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Little Rock, Arkansas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 30, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 8 of 8] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873128675; 14313-2_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Bruswick), in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan (Reuse Master Plan), as approved by the Brunswick Local Redevelopment Authority, is proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. The Navy is required to close NAS Brunswick in accordance with Public Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta, the state capital. The main gate is located on Bath Road, approximately 2 miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. Two alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of approximately 1,630 acres. In addition, approximately 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of approximately 1,580 acres. In addition, approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. Under Alternative 2, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. The reuse of these properties is the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternatives 1 and 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. It is expected that reuse of the installation would generate new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 46 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100162, 1,668 pages, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Wastes KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128675?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 7 of 8] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873128669; 14313-2_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Bruswick), in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan (Reuse Master Plan), as approved by the Brunswick Local Redevelopment Authority, is proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. The Navy is required to close NAS Brunswick in accordance with Public Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta, the state capital. The main gate is located on Bath Road, approximately 2 miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. Two alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of approximately 1,630 acres. In addition, approximately 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of approximately 1,580 acres. In addition, approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. Under Alternative 2, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. The reuse of these properties is the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternatives 1 and 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. It is expected that reuse of the installation would generate new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 46 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100162, 1,668 pages, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Wastes KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128669?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 6 of 8] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873128657; 14313-2_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Bruswick), in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan (Reuse Master Plan), as approved by the Brunswick Local Redevelopment Authority, is proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. The Navy is required to close NAS Brunswick in accordance with Public Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta, the state capital. The main gate is located on Bath Road, approximately 2 miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. Two alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of approximately 1,630 acres. In addition, approximately 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of approximately 1,580 acres. In addition, approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. Under Alternative 2, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. The reuse of these properties is the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternatives 1 and 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. It is expected that reuse of the installation would generate new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 46 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100162, 1,668 pages, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Wastes KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128657?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 5 of 8] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873128647; 14313-2_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Bruswick), in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan (Reuse Master Plan), as approved by the Brunswick Local Redevelopment Authority, is proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. The Navy is required to close NAS Brunswick in accordance with Public Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta, the state capital. The main gate is located on Bath Road, approximately 2 miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. Two alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of approximately 1,630 acres. In addition, approximately 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of approximately 1,580 acres. In addition, approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. Under Alternative 2, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. The reuse of these properties is the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternatives 1 and 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. It is expected that reuse of the installation would generate new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 46 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100162, 1,668 pages, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Wastes KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128647?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 4 of 8] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873128631; 14313-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Bruswick), in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan (Reuse Master Plan), as approved by the Brunswick Local Redevelopment Authority, is proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. The Navy is required to close NAS Brunswick in accordance with Public Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta, the state capital. The main gate is located on Bath Road, approximately 2 miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. Two alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of approximately 1,630 acres. In addition, approximately 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of approximately 1,580 acres. In addition, approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. Under Alternative 2, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. The reuse of these properties is the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternatives 1 and 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. It is expected that reuse of the installation would generate new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 46 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100162, 1,668 pages, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Wastes KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128631?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 3 of 8] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873128610; 14313-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Bruswick), in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan (Reuse Master Plan), as approved by the Brunswick Local Redevelopment Authority, is proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. The Navy is required to close NAS Brunswick in accordance with Public Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta, the state capital. The main gate is located on Bath Road, approximately 2 miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. Two alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of approximately 1,630 acres. In addition, approximately 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of approximately 1,580 acres. In addition, approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. Under Alternative 2, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. The reuse of these properties is the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternatives 1 and 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. It is expected that reuse of the installation would generate new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 46 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100162, 1,668 pages, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Wastes KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128610?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 2 of 8] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873128572; 14313-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Bruswick), in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan (Reuse Master Plan), as approved by the Brunswick Local Redevelopment Authority, is proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. The Navy is required to close NAS Brunswick in accordance with Public Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta, the state capital. The main gate is located on Bath Road, approximately 2 miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. Two alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of approximately 1,630 acres. In addition, approximately 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of approximately 1,580 acres. In addition, approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. Under Alternative 2, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. The reuse of these properties is the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternatives 1 and 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. It is expected that reuse of the installation would generate new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 46 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100162, 1,668 pages, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Wastes KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128572?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. [Part 1 of 8] T2 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 873128548; 14313-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Bruswick), in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan (Reuse Master Plan), as approved by the Brunswick Local Redevelopment Authority, is proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. The Navy is required to close NAS Brunswick in accordance with Public Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta, the state capital. The main gate is located on Bath Road, approximately 2 miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. Two alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of approximately 1,630 acres. In addition, approximately 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of approximately 1,580 acres. In addition, approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. Under Alternative 2, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. The reuse of these properties is the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternatives 1 and 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. It is expected that reuse of the installation would generate new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 46 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100162, 1,668 pages, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Wastes KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128548?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PELLISSIPPI PARKWAY EXTENSION (STATE ROUTE (SR) 162) FROM SR 33 (OLD KNOXVILLE HIGHWAY) TO US 321/SR 73/LAMAR ALAEXANDER PARKWAY, BLOUNT COUNTY, TENNESSEE. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - PELLISSIPPI PARKWAY EXTENSION (STATE ROUTE (SR) 162) FROM SR 33 (OLD KNOXVILLE HIGHWAY) TO US 321/SR 73/LAMAR ALAEXANDER PARKWAY, BLOUNT COUNTY, TENNESSEE. AN - 756827422; 14311-100160_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of Pellissippi Parkway (State Route (SR) 162) from its current terminus at SR 33 (Old Knoxville Highway) to US 321/SR 73/Lamar Alexander Parkway in Blount County, Tennessee is proposed. The study area encompasses portions of the cities of Maryville, Alcoa, and Rockford, and the unincorporated Eagleton Village. Blount County is bordered on the north by Knox County, home to the majority of employment in the East Tennessee region. Interstate 40 (I-40) runs through Knox County, and SR 115/US 129 (Alcoa Highway) and SR 33 are major roadways connecting Alcoa and Maryville with Knox County. Blount County is bordered on the east by Sevier County, the fastest growing county in East Tennessee, while Blount County is the region's second fastest growing county. The concept of extending Pellissippi Parkway as a four-lane divided highway has been part of Knoxville regional transportation planning since 1977. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Build alternatives A and C would extend Pellissippi Parkway as a new four-lane divided roadway with diamond interchanges at SR 33, SR 35/US 411/SR 35, and SR 73/US 321 and share a common alignment from SR 33 to the vicinity of Brown School Road south of Wildwood Road. Alternative A would be 4.4 miles in length, while Alternative C would be about 4.7 miles in length. The proposed right-of-way for either alignment alternative would be a minimum of 300 feet and would be designed for traffic traveling 60 miles per hour. Build Alternative D would use portions of existing Sam Houston School Road, Peppermint Road, Hitch Road, and Helton Road to construct an improved two-lane roadway with a 50 mile-per-hour design speed. The length of the corridor would be about 5.8 miles. Total estimated costs for alternatives A, C, and D are $96.9 million, $104.6 million, and $59.5 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would enhance regional transportation system linkages; improve circumferential mobility by providing travel options to the existing radial roadway network; enhance roadway safety; and assist in achieving acceptable traffic flows. Travel time savings over the No Build Alternative are estimated at 11 minutes for alternatives A and C and seven to nine minutes for Alternative D. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of alternatives A and C would do little to improve portions of the local road network with substandard cross sections. Build Alternative A would require eight stream crossings, 17.3 acres of floodplain encroachment, displacement of 10 farm parcels, and displacement of five residences and one business. Build Alternative C would require seven stream crossings, 20.5 acres of floodplain encroachment, displacement of 12 farm parcels, and displacement of 26 residences and two businesses. Build Alternative D would require eight stream crossings, 18.4 acres of floodplain encroachment, and displacement of 24 farm parcels and 21 residences. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100160, 370 pages and maps, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Tennessee KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827422?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PELLISSIPPI+PARKWAY+EXTENSION+%28STATE+ROUTE+%28SR%29+162%29+FROM+SR+33+%28OLD+KNOXVILLE+HIGHWAY%29+TO+US+321%2FSR+73%2FLAMAR+ALAEXANDER+PARKWAY%2C+BLOUNT+COUNTY%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.title=PELLISSIPPI+PARKWAY+EXTENSION+%28STATE+ROUTE+%28SR%29+162%29+FROM+SR+33+%28OLD+KNOXVILLE+HIGHWAY%29+TO+US+321%2FSR+73%2FLAMAR+ALAEXANDER+PARKWAY%2C+BLOUNT+COUNTY%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Nashville, Tennessee; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PELLISSIPPI PARKWAY EXTENSION (STATE ROUTE (SR) 162) FROM SR 33 (OLD KNOXVILLE HIGHWAY) TO US 321/SR 73/LAMAR ALAEXANDER PARKWAY, BLOUNT COUNTY, TENNESSEE. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - PELLISSIPPI PARKWAY EXTENSION (STATE ROUTE (SR) 162) FROM SR 33 (OLD KNOXVILLE HIGHWAY) TO US 321/SR 73/LAMAR ALAEXANDER PARKWAY, BLOUNT COUNTY, TENNESSEE. AN - 756827118; 14311-100160_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of Pellissippi Parkway (State Route (SR) 162) from its current terminus at SR 33 (Old Knoxville Highway) to US 321/SR 73/Lamar Alexander Parkway in Blount County, Tennessee is proposed. The study area encompasses portions of the cities of Maryville, Alcoa, and Rockford, and the unincorporated Eagleton Village. Blount County is bordered on the north by Knox County, home to the majority of employment in the East Tennessee region. Interstate 40 (I-40) runs through Knox County, and SR 115/US 129 (Alcoa Highway) and SR 33 are major roadways connecting Alcoa and Maryville with Knox County. Blount County is bordered on the east by Sevier County, the fastest growing county in East Tennessee, while Blount County is the region's second fastest growing county. The concept of extending Pellissippi Parkway as a four-lane divided highway has been part of Knoxville regional transportation planning since 1977. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Build alternatives A and C would extend Pellissippi Parkway as a new four-lane divided roadway with diamond interchanges at SR 33, SR 35/US 411/SR 35, and SR 73/US 321 and share a common alignment from SR 33 to the vicinity of Brown School Road south of Wildwood Road. Alternative A would be 4.4 miles in length, while Alternative C would be about 4.7 miles in length. The proposed right-of-way for either alignment alternative would be a minimum of 300 feet and would be designed for traffic traveling 60 miles per hour. Build Alternative D would use portions of existing Sam Houston School Road, Peppermint Road, Hitch Road, and Helton Road to construct an improved two-lane roadway with a 50 mile-per-hour design speed. The length of the corridor would be about 5.8 miles. Total estimated costs for alternatives A, C, and D are $96.9 million, $104.6 million, and $59.5 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would enhance regional transportation system linkages; improve circumferential mobility by providing travel options to the existing radial roadway network; enhance roadway safety; and assist in achieving acceptable traffic flows. Travel time savings over the No Build Alternative are estimated at 11 minutes for alternatives A and C and seven to nine minutes for Alternative D. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of alternatives A and C would do little to improve portions of the local road network with substandard cross sections. Build Alternative A would require eight stream crossings, 17.3 acres of floodplain encroachment, displacement of 10 farm parcels, and displacement of five residences and one business. Build Alternative C would require seven stream crossings, 20.5 acres of floodplain encroachment, displacement of 12 farm parcels, and displacement of 26 residences and two businesses. Build Alternative D would require eight stream crossings, 18.4 acres of floodplain encroachment, and displacement of 24 farm parcels and 21 residences. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100160, 370 pages and maps, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Tennessee KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827118?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PELLISSIPPI+PARKWAY+EXTENSION+%28STATE+ROUTE+%28SR%29+162%29+FROM+SR+33+%28OLD+KNOXVILLE+HIGHWAY%29+TO+US+321%2FSR+73%2FLAMAR+ALAEXANDER+PARKWAY%2C+BLOUNT+COUNTY%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.title=PELLISSIPPI+PARKWAY+EXTENSION+%28STATE+ROUTE+%28SR%29+162%29+FROM+SR+33+%28OLD+KNOXVILLE+HIGHWAY%29+TO+US+321%2FSR+73%2FLAMAR+ALAEXANDER+PARKWAY%2C+BLOUNT+COUNTY%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Nashville, Tennessee; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PELLISSIPPI PARKWAY EXTENSION (STATE ROUTE (SR) 162) FROM SR 33 (OLD KNOXVILLE HIGHWAY) TO US 321/SR 73/LAMAR ALAEXANDER PARKWAY, BLOUNT COUNTY, TENNESSEE. AN - 16384200; 14311 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of Pellissippi Parkway (State Route (SR) 162) from its current terminus at SR 33 (Old Knoxville Highway) to US 321/SR 73/Lamar Alexander Parkway in Blount County, Tennessee is proposed. The study area encompasses portions of the cities of Maryville, Alcoa, and Rockford, and the unincorporated Eagleton Village. Blount County is bordered on the north by Knox County, home to the majority of employment in the East Tennessee region. Interstate 40 (I-40) runs through Knox County, and SR 115/US 129 (Alcoa Highway) and SR 33 are major roadways connecting Alcoa and Maryville with Knox County. Blount County is bordered on the east by Sevier County, the fastest growing county in East Tennessee, while Blount County is the region's second fastest growing county. The concept of extending Pellissippi Parkway as a four-lane divided highway has been part of Knoxville regional transportation planning since 1977. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Build alternatives A and C would extend Pellissippi Parkway as a new four-lane divided roadway with diamond interchanges at SR 33, SR 35/US 411/SR 35, and SR 73/US 321 and share a common alignment from SR 33 to the vicinity of Brown School Road south of Wildwood Road. Alternative A would be 4.4 miles in length, while Alternative C would be about 4.7 miles in length. The proposed right-of-way for either alignment alternative would be a minimum of 300 feet and would be designed for traffic traveling 60 miles per hour. Build Alternative D would use portions of existing Sam Houston School Road, Peppermint Road, Hitch Road, and Helton Road to construct an improved two-lane roadway with a 50 mile-per-hour design speed. The length of the corridor would be about 5.8 miles. Total estimated costs for alternatives A, C, and D are $96.9 million, $104.6 million, and $59.5 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction would enhance regional transportation system linkages; improve circumferential mobility by providing travel options to the existing radial roadway network; enhance roadway safety; and assist in achieving acceptable traffic flows. Travel time savings over the No Build Alternative are estimated at 11 minutes for alternatives A and C and seven to nine minutes for Alternative D. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of alternatives A and C would do little to improve portions of the local road network with substandard cross sections. Build Alternative A would require eight stream crossings, 17.3 acres of floodplain encroachment, displacement of 10 farm parcels, and displacement of five residences and one business. Build Alternative C would require seven stream crossings, 20.5 acres of floodplain encroachment, displacement of 12 farm parcels, and displacement of 26 residences and two businesses. Build Alternative D would require eight stream crossings, 18.4 acres of floodplain encroachment, and displacement of 24 farm parcels and 21 residences. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100160, 370 pages and maps, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Tennessee KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16384200?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PELLISSIPPI+PARKWAY+EXTENSION+%28STATE+ROUTE+%28SR%29+162%29+FROM+SR+33+%28OLD+KNOXVILLE+HIGHWAY%29+TO+US+321%2FSR+73%2FLAMAR+ALAEXANDER+PARKWAY%2C+BLOUNT+COUNTY%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.title=PELLISSIPPI+PARKWAY+EXTENSION+%28STATE+ROUTE+%28SR%29+162%29+FROM+SR+33+%28OLD+KNOXVILLE+HIGHWAY%29+TO+US+321%2FSR+73%2FLAMAR+ALAEXANDER+PARKWAY%2C+BLOUNT+COUNTY%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Nashville, Tennessee; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION DISPOSAL AND REUSE, BRUNSWICK, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, MAINE. AN - 15225935; 14313 AB - PURPOSE: The disposal of Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine (NAS Bruswick), in a manner consistent with the Brunswick Naval Air Station Reuse Master Plan (Reuse Master Plan), as approved by the Brunswick Local Redevelopment Authority, is proposed. In addition to the NAS Brunswick property, the disposal of the McKeen Street Housing Annex, East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site, and Sabino Hill Rake Station are also proposed. The Navy is required to close NAS Brunswick in accordance with Public Law 101-510, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended in 2005. NAS Brunswick is situated on 3,137 acres in the town of Brunswick, Cumberland County, Maine. The facility is approximately 27 miles northeast of Portland and 31 miles south of Augusta, the state capital. The main gate is located on Bath Road, approximately 2 miles east of the downtown Brunswick business district. Two alternatives and a No Action Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. Under the No Action Alternative, the U.S. government would retain the NAS Brunswick property in caretaker status. Alternative 1, which is the preferred alternative, would involve reusing the property in a manner consistent with the Reuse Master Plan. Full build-out would be implemented over a 20-year period with development of approximately 1,630 acres. In addition, approximately 1,570 acres would be dedicated to a variety of active and passive uses, including recreation, open space, and natural areas. This alternative is based upon reuse of the existing airfield and its supporting infrastructure, a mix of land use types and densities, and the preservation of open space and natural areas. Under Alternative 1, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. Alternative 2 would consist of a higher density of residential and mixed-use development and no reuse of the airfield. Full build-out of Alternative 2 would be implemented in stages over a 20-year period and would involve development of approximately 1,580 acres. In addition, approximately 1,620 acres would be dedicated to active and passive recreation, open spaces, and natural areas. Under Alternative 2, the McKeen Street Housing Annex would remain residential, and the East Brunswick Radio Transmitter Site would be utilized as recreational, open space, and natural areas. The Sabino Hill Rake Station property would be utilized for parks and recreation. The reuse of these properties is the same under Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Alternatives 1 and 2 would result in an increase in recreational, open space, conservation, and natural areas. It is expected that reuse of the installation would generate new property tax revenue for the Town of Brunswick. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: At full build-out under Alternative 1, 1,146 acres of undeveloped land, including 690 acres of upland forest, could be affected, and 25 acres of grassland and 46 acres of maintained grass could be developed. A total of 1,060 acres would be preserved. Under Alternative 2, 1,068 acres of undeveloped land, including 578 acres of upland forest, could be removed, and 65 acres of grassland and 301 acres of maintained grass could be developed while a total of 1,280 acres would be preserved. Initial disposal of NAS Brunswick under either Alternatives 1 or 2 would result in a short-term reduction of income and employment, which would be mitigated through construction spending and new development. LEGAL MANDATES: Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100162, 1,668 pages, April 28, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Wastes KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Buildings KW - Housing KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Navy) KW - Municipal Services KW - Open Space KW - Property Disposition KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Maine KW - Naval Air Station Brunswick Maine KW - Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/15225935?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.title=BRUNSWICK+NAVAL+AIR+STATION+DISPOSAL+AND+REUSE%2C+BRUNSWICK%2C+CUMBERLAND+COUNTY%2C+MAINE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Navy, BRAC Program Management Office Northeast, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; NAVY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-29 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 28, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Nebraska's innovative Streamlining Workshops to enhance collaboration among local, state and Federal agencies to meet American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) deadlines T2 - 35th Annual Conference of the National Association of Environmental Professionals (NAEP 2010) AN - 754178968; 5735254 JF - 35th Annual Conference of the National Association of Environmental Professionals (NAEP 2010) AU - Grachen, David Y1 - 2010/04/27/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Apr 27 KW - USA, Nebraska KW - Innovations KW - Governments KW - U 4300:Environmental Science UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754178968?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=35th+Annual+Conference+of+the+National+Association+of+Environmental+Professionals+%28NAEP+2010%29&rft.atitle=Nebraska%27s+innovative+Streamlining+Workshops+to+enhance+collaboration+among+local%2C+state+and+Federal+agencies+to+meet+American+Recovery+and+Reinvestment+Act+%28ARRA%29+deadlines&rft.au=Grachen%2C+David&rft.aulast=Grachen&rft.aufirst=David&rft.date=2010-04-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=35th+Annual+Conference+of+the+National+Association+of+Environmental+Professionals+%28NAEP+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://data.memberclicks.com/site/naep/10Final%20Programweb%20.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Using the Tennessee Environmental Streamlining Agreement (TESA) to engage resource agencies early in the environmental planning process for complex projects T2 - 35th Annual Conference of the National Association of Environmental Professionals (NAEP 2010) AN - 754163816; 5735255 JF - 35th Annual Conference of the National Association of Environmental Professionals (NAEP 2010) AU - Delaney, Douglas Y1 - 2010/04/27/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Apr 27 KW - USA, Tennessee KW - Environmental planning KW - Planning KW - U 4300:Environmental Science UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754163816?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=35th+Annual+Conference+of+the+National+Association+of+Environmental+Professionals+%28NAEP+2010%29&rft.atitle=Using+the+Tennessee+Environmental+Streamlining+Agreement+%28TESA%29+to+engage+resource+agencies+early+in+the+environmental+planning+process+for+complex+projects&rft.au=Delaney%2C+Douglas&rft.aulast=Delaney&rft.aufirst=Douglas&rft.date=2010-04-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=35th+Annual+Conference+of+the+National+Association+of+Environmental+Professionals+%28NAEP+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://data.memberclicks.com/site/naep/10Final%20Programweb%20.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Erionite, a Naturally Occurring Fibrous Mineral Hazard in the Tri-State Area of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana T2 - 62nd Annual Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Section, Geological Society of America AN - 754214508; 5766304 JF - 62nd Annual Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Section, Geological Society of America AU - Goodman, Brian AU - Pierson, Patrick Y1 - 2010/04/21/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Apr 21 KW - USA, North Dakota KW - USA, South Dakota KW - USA, Montana KW - Minerals KW - Hazards KW - U 7000:Multidisciplinary UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754214508?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=62nd+Annual+Meeting+of+the+Rocky+Mountain+Section%2C+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.atitle=Erionite%2C+a+Naturally+Occurring+Fibrous+Mineral+Hazard+in+the+Tri-State+Area+of+North+Dakota%2C+South+Dakota%2C+and+Montana&rft.au=Goodman%2C+Brian%3BPierson%2C+Patrick&rft.aulast=Goodman&rft.aufirst=Brian&rft.date=2010-04-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=62nd+Annual+Meeting+of+the+Rocky+Mountain+Section%2C+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.geosociety.org/sectdiv/rockymtn/2010mtg/rm2010_awp.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HOLLISTER TO GILROY STATE ROUTE 25 WIDENING AND ROUTE ADOPTION, SAN BENITO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - HOLLISTER TO GILROY STATE ROUTE 25 WIDENING AND ROUTE ADOPTION, SAN BENITO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827405; 14297-100146_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of 11.2 miles of the existing State Route (SR) 25 two-lane highway with a four-lane expressway in San Benito and Santa Clara counties, California is proposed. SR 25 runs northwest through Hollister Valley ending at U.S. 101 after crossing the Pajaro River and Carnadero Creek. Agriculture dominates the surrounding landscape and slow-moving farm equipment and trucks share this roadway with local and commuter traffic. Two proposed projects are evaluated in this Tier 1 draft EIS: a route adoption and a proposed construction project within the limits of the proposed route adoption. Five alternatives are under consideration: a No Build Alternative; two route adoption alignments (Alternatives 1 and 2); and two proposed build alternatives (Alternatives A and B). Both route adoption alternatives would extend 11.2 miles and share the same alignment from 0.5 mile south of Shore Road in San Benito County to U.S. 101 in Santa Clara County. Between 0.5 mile south of Shore Road and the southern end of the project at San Felipe Road, Alternative 1 proposes to align the future four-lane expressway generally to the east of the existing highway. Alternative 2 would be aligned mostly to the west of the existing two-lane highway. Both alignments would be wide enough to accommodate a future four-lane expressway, which would be 342 feet in width including the median, and frontage roads on one or both sides. Other improvements would include new bridges over the Pajaro River and Carnadero Creek, and overcrossings of the Union Pacific Railroad Hollister Branch line and the Union Pacific main line just east of U.S. 101. The proposed build alternatives would extend 3.8 miles in San Benito County, from San Felipe Road in Hollister to just west of Hudner Lane. A four-lane expressway would replace the existing two-lane conventional highway. Alternative A would be constructed at the southeastern end of the Alternative 1 route adoption alignment. Alternative B would be constructed at the southwestern end of the Alternative 2 route adoption alignment. Unlike the route adoption alternatives, the build alternatives propose a realigned and widened at-grade intersection instead of an interchange at State Route 25 and State Route 156. Construction for this portion of the route is proposed in 2015. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed route adoption would facilitate local and regional land use planning by identifying future right-of-way needed for the SR 25 corridor. The proposed build project would improve traffic flow and reduce delays on SR 25 between San Felipe Road in Hollister and Hudner Lane in San Benito County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The route adoption alternatives would have potential impacts to riparian habitat and wildlife migration corridors along the Pajaro River and Carnadero Creek, including critical habitat for Central California steelhead and the California tiger salamander. The proposed build alternatives would result in unavoidable impacts to farmland with up to 660 acres being converted. Relocations of up to 21 residences, 10 businesses, and various utilities would be required. Noise impact could occur at one location. Potential impacts to visual resources, biological resources, aggregate mining, paleontology, and hazardous waste could also occur. JF - EPA number: 100146, 338 pages and maps, April 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Fish KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827405?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HOLLISTER+TO+GILROY+STATE+ROUTE+25+WIDENING+AND+ROUTE+ADOPTION%2C+SAN+BENITO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HOLLISTER+TO+GILROY+STATE+ROUTE+25+WIDENING+AND+ROUTE+ADOPTION%2C+SAN+BENITO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HOLLISTER TO GILROY STATE ROUTE 25 WIDENING AND ROUTE ADOPTION, SAN BENITO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 754909408; 14297 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of 11.2 miles of the existing State Route (SR) 25 two-lane highway with a four-lane expressway in San Benito and Santa Clara counties, California is proposed. SR 25 runs northwest through Hollister Valley ending at U.S. 101 after crossing the Pajaro River and Carnadero Creek. Agriculture dominates the surrounding landscape and slow-moving farm equipment and trucks share this roadway with local and commuter traffic. Two proposed projects are evaluated in this Tier 1 draft EIS: a route adoption and a proposed construction project within the limits of the proposed route adoption. Five alternatives are under consideration: a No Build Alternative; two route adoption alignments (Alternatives 1 and 2); and two proposed build alternatives (Alternatives A and B). Both route adoption alternatives would extend 11.2 miles and share the same alignment from 0.5 mile south of Shore Road in San Benito County to U.S. 101 in Santa Clara County. Between 0.5 mile south of Shore Road and the southern end of the project at San Felipe Road, Alternative 1 proposes to align the future four-lane expressway generally to the east of the existing highway. Alternative 2 would be aligned mostly to the west of the existing two-lane highway. Both alignments would be wide enough to accommodate a future four-lane expressway, which would be 342 feet in width including the median, and frontage roads on one or both sides. Other improvements would include new bridges over the Pajaro River and Carnadero Creek, and overcrossings of the Union Pacific Railroad Hollister Branch line and the Union Pacific main line just east of U.S. 101. The proposed build alternatives would extend 3.8 miles in San Benito County, from San Felipe Road in Hollister to just west of Hudner Lane. A four-lane expressway would replace the existing two-lane conventional highway. Alternative A would be constructed at the southeastern end of the Alternative 1 route adoption alignment. Alternative B would be constructed at the southwestern end of the Alternative 2 route adoption alignment. Unlike the route adoption alternatives, the build alternatives propose a realigned and widened at-grade intersection instead of an interchange at State Route 25 and State Route 156. Construction for this portion of the route is proposed in 2015. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed route adoption would facilitate local and regional land use planning by identifying future right-of-way needed for the SR 25 corridor. The proposed build project would improve traffic flow and reduce delays on SR 25 between San Felipe Road in Hollister and Hudner Lane in San Benito County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The route adoption alternatives would have potential impacts to riparian habitat and wildlife migration corridors along the Pajaro River and Carnadero Creek, including critical habitat for Central California steelhead and the California tiger salamander. The proposed build alternatives would result in unavoidable impacts to farmland with up to 660 acres being converted. Relocations of up to 21 residences, 10 businesses, and various utilities would be required. Noise impact could occur at one location. Potential impacts to visual resources, biological resources, aggregate mining, paleontology, and hazardous waste could also occur. JF - EPA number: 100146, 338 pages and maps, April 19, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Fish KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754909408?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HOLLISTER+TO+GILROY+STATE+ROUTE+25+WIDENING+AND+ROUTE+ADOPTION%2C+SAN+BENITO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=HOLLISTER+TO+GILROY+STATE+ROUTE+25+WIDENING+AND+ROUTE+ADOPTION%2C+SAN+BENITO+AND+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NC 24 FROM 2.8 MILES EAST OF I-95 TO I-40, CUMBERLAND, SAMPSON, AND DUPLIN COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 3 of 3] T2 - NC 24 FROM 2.8 MILES EAST OF I-95 TO I-40, CUMBERLAND, SAMPSON, AND DUPLIN COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 756827272; 14294-100143_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of North Carolina Route 24 (NC 24) from 2.8 miles east of Interstate 95 (I-95) to I-40 in Cumberland, Sampson, and Duplin counties, North Carolina is proposed. NC 24 has long been an element of the southeastern North Carolina transportation system. Bridge structures along the facility were constructed between 1947 and 1967 and most are in need of repair and upgrading; and several locations on NC 24 between Clinton and Warsaw suffer from physical deficiencies in sight distance, alignment, and shoulder width. A July 1994 draft EIS proposed improvement of the NC 24 corridor to rectify these deficiencies and upgrade the facility. Changes in the conditions of the facility and transportation needs in the area rendered the draft EIS inapplicable and it has been rescinded. The currently proposed action would involve a combination of widening, reconstruction on new alignment, and other improvements to existing NC 24 to create a four-lane divided facility. Based on the need to avoid disruption to developments within corridor towns, the project would provide bypasses and/or other alternative routings around Stedman, Autryville, and Roseboro. The highway would follow a portion of the Faircloth Freeway in order to bypass Clinton. To the east of Clinton, the route would follow a new location. Widened portions would have partial control of access, while new location segments would have limited access control. Most intersections would remain at-grade. In addition to the proposed Upgrade Alternative, this final EIS considers a No Build Alternative; the former alternative has been segmented into 72 alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The upgraded facility would improve regional and interstate movements between I-95 and I-40, while improving local access across the towns of Clinton, Stedman, Autryville, and Roseboro. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way acquisition would result in the displacement of 164 to 227 residences, 20 to 29 commercial units, two to five churches, 460-566 acres of forest, 51 to 72 acres of wetlands, and 266 to 365 acres of prime farmland and 506 to 547 acres of farmland of state and local importance. The project would encroach on 11,600 to15,400 linear feet of floodplain and require realignment of 6,951 to 9,599 linear feet of stream channel. Five architectural resource sites and two archaeological sites identified as potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places could be affected. Two to six known cemeteries could be affected. Several major electric transmission and distribution lines would be crossed. Traffic-general noise levels would exceed federal standards at 52 to 72 sensitive receptor sites. The facility would significantly alter aesthetics in an otherwise rural area. Construction workers would encounter 45 to 59 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0432D, Volume 30, Number 3. For the abstract of the rescinded 1994 draft EIS, see 94-0335D, Volume 18. JF - EPA number: 100143, 422 pages and maps, April 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cemeteries KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827272?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NC+24+FROM+2.8+MILES+EAST+OF+I-95+TO+I-40%2C+CUMBERLAND%2C+SAMPSON%2C+AND+DUPLIN+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=NC+24+FROM+2.8+MILES+EAST+OF+I-95+TO+I-40%2C+CUMBERLAND%2C+SAMPSON%2C+AND+DUPLIN+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NC 24 FROM 2.8 MILES EAST OF I-95 TO I-40, CUMBERLAND, SAMPSON, AND DUPLIN COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 2 of 3] T2 - NC 24 FROM 2.8 MILES EAST OF I-95 TO I-40, CUMBERLAND, SAMPSON, AND DUPLIN COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 756827243; 14294-100143_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of North Carolina Route 24 (NC 24) from 2.8 miles east of Interstate 95 (I-95) to I-40 in Cumberland, Sampson, and Duplin counties, North Carolina is proposed. NC 24 has long been an element of the southeastern North Carolina transportation system. Bridge structures along the facility were constructed between 1947 and 1967 and most are in need of repair and upgrading; and several locations on NC 24 between Clinton and Warsaw suffer from physical deficiencies in sight distance, alignment, and shoulder width. A July 1994 draft EIS proposed improvement of the NC 24 corridor to rectify these deficiencies and upgrade the facility. Changes in the conditions of the facility and transportation needs in the area rendered the draft EIS inapplicable and it has been rescinded. The currently proposed action would involve a combination of widening, reconstruction on new alignment, and other improvements to existing NC 24 to create a four-lane divided facility. Based on the need to avoid disruption to developments within corridor towns, the project would provide bypasses and/or other alternative routings around Stedman, Autryville, and Roseboro. The highway would follow a portion of the Faircloth Freeway in order to bypass Clinton. To the east of Clinton, the route would follow a new location. Widened portions would have partial control of access, while new location segments would have limited access control. Most intersections would remain at-grade. In addition to the proposed Upgrade Alternative, this final EIS considers a No Build Alternative; the former alternative has been segmented into 72 alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The upgraded facility would improve regional and interstate movements between I-95 and I-40, while improving local access across the towns of Clinton, Stedman, Autryville, and Roseboro. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way acquisition would result in the displacement of 164 to 227 residences, 20 to 29 commercial units, two to five churches, 460-566 acres of forest, 51 to 72 acres of wetlands, and 266 to 365 acres of prime farmland and 506 to 547 acres of farmland of state and local importance. The project would encroach on 11,600 to15,400 linear feet of floodplain and require realignment of 6,951 to 9,599 linear feet of stream channel. Five architectural resource sites and two archaeological sites identified as potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places could be affected. Two to six known cemeteries could be affected. Several major electric transmission and distribution lines would be crossed. Traffic-general noise levels would exceed federal standards at 52 to 72 sensitive receptor sites. The facility would significantly alter aesthetics in an otherwise rural area. Construction workers would encounter 45 to 59 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0432D, Volume 30, Number 3. For the abstract of the rescinded 1994 draft EIS, see 94-0335D, Volume 18. JF - EPA number: 100143, 422 pages and maps, April 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cemeteries KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827243?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NC+24+FROM+2.8+MILES+EAST+OF+I-95+TO+I-40%2C+CUMBERLAND%2C+SAMPSON%2C+AND+DUPLIN+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=NC+24+FROM+2.8+MILES+EAST+OF+I-95+TO+I-40%2C+CUMBERLAND%2C+SAMPSON%2C+AND+DUPLIN+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NC 24 FROM 2.8 MILES EAST OF I-95 TO I-40, CUMBERLAND, SAMPSON, AND DUPLIN COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 1 of 3] T2 - NC 24 FROM 2.8 MILES EAST OF I-95 TO I-40, CUMBERLAND, SAMPSON, AND DUPLIN COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 756827231; 14294-100143_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of North Carolina Route 24 (NC 24) from 2.8 miles east of Interstate 95 (I-95) to I-40 in Cumberland, Sampson, and Duplin counties, North Carolina is proposed. NC 24 has long been an element of the southeastern North Carolina transportation system. Bridge structures along the facility were constructed between 1947 and 1967 and most are in need of repair and upgrading; and several locations on NC 24 between Clinton and Warsaw suffer from physical deficiencies in sight distance, alignment, and shoulder width. A July 1994 draft EIS proposed improvement of the NC 24 corridor to rectify these deficiencies and upgrade the facility. Changes in the conditions of the facility and transportation needs in the area rendered the draft EIS inapplicable and it has been rescinded. The currently proposed action would involve a combination of widening, reconstruction on new alignment, and other improvements to existing NC 24 to create a four-lane divided facility. Based on the need to avoid disruption to developments within corridor towns, the project would provide bypasses and/or other alternative routings around Stedman, Autryville, and Roseboro. The highway would follow a portion of the Faircloth Freeway in order to bypass Clinton. To the east of Clinton, the route would follow a new location. Widened portions would have partial control of access, while new location segments would have limited access control. Most intersections would remain at-grade. In addition to the proposed Upgrade Alternative, this final EIS considers a No Build Alternative; the former alternative has been segmented into 72 alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The upgraded facility would improve regional and interstate movements between I-95 and I-40, while improving local access across the towns of Clinton, Stedman, Autryville, and Roseboro. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way acquisition would result in the displacement of 164 to 227 residences, 20 to 29 commercial units, two to five churches, 460-566 acres of forest, 51 to 72 acres of wetlands, and 266 to 365 acres of prime farmland and 506 to 547 acres of farmland of state and local importance. The project would encroach on 11,600 to15,400 linear feet of floodplain and require realignment of 6,951 to 9,599 linear feet of stream channel. Five architectural resource sites and two archaeological sites identified as potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places could be affected. Two to six known cemeteries could be affected. Several major electric transmission and distribution lines would be crossed. Traffic-general noise levels would exceed federal standards at 52 to 72 sensitive receptor sites. The facility would significantly alter aesthetics in an otherwise rural area. Construction workers would encounter 45 to 59 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0432D, Volume 30, Number 3. For the abstract of the rescinded 1994 draft EIS, see 94-0335D, Volume 18. JF - EPA number: 100143, 422 pages and maps, April 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cemeteries KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827231?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NC+24+FROM+2.8+MILES+EAST+OF+I-95+TO+I-40%2C+CUMBERLAND%2C+SAMPSON%2C+AND+DUPLIN+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=NC+24+FROM+2.8+MILES+EAST+OF+I-95+TO+I-40%2C+CUMBERLAND%2C+SAMPSON%2C+AND+DUPLIN+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NC 24 FROM 2.8 MILES EAST OF I-95 TO I-40, CUMBERLAND, SAMPSON, AND DUPLIN COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 16373907; 14294 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of North Carolina Route 24 (NC 24) from 2.8 miles east of Interstate 95 (I-95) to I-40 in Cumberland, Sampson, and Duplin counties, North Carolina is proposed. NC 24 has long been an element of the southeastern North Carolina transportation system. Bridge structures along the facility were constructed between 1947 and 1967 and most are in need of repair and upgrading; and several locations on NC 24 between Clinton and Warsaw suffer from physical deficiencies in sight distance, alignment, and shoulder width. A July 1994 draft EIS proposed improvement of the NC 24 corridor to rectify these deficiencies and upgrade the facility. Changes in the conditions of the facility and transportation needs in the area rendered the draft EIS inapplicable and it has been rescinded. The currently proposed action would involve a combination of widening, reconstruction on new alignment, and other improvements to existing NC 24 to create a four-lane divided facility. Based on the need to avoid disruption to developments within corridor towns, the project would provide bypasses and/or other alternative routings around Stedman, Autryville, and Roseboro. The highway would follow a portion of the Faircloth Freeway in order to bypass Clinton. To the east of Clinton, the route would follow a new location. Widened portions would have partial control of access, while new location segments would have limited access control. Most intersections would remain at-grade. In addition to the proposed Upgrade Alternative, this final EIS considers a No Build Alternative; the former alternative has been segmented into 72 alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The upgraded facility would improve regional and interstate movements between I-95 and I-40, while improving local access across the towns of Clinton, Stedman, Autryville, and Roseboro. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way acquisition would result in the displacement of 164 to 227 residences, 20 to 29 commercial units, two to five churches, 460-566 acres of forest, 51 to 72 acres of wetlands, and 266 to 365 acres of prime farmland and 506 to 547 acres of farmland of state and local importance. The project would encroach on 11,600 to15,400 linear feet of floodplain and require realignment of 6,951 to 9,599 linear feet of stream channel. Five architectural resource sites and two archaeological sites identified as potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places could be affected. Two to six known cemeteries could be affected. Several major electric transmission and distribution lines would be crossed. Traffic-general noise levels would exceed federal standards at 52 to 72 sensitive receptor sites. The facility would significantly alter aesthetics in an otherwise rural area. Construction workers would encounter 45 to 59 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0432D, Volume 30, Number 3. For the abstract of the rescinded 1994 draft EIS, see 94-0335D, Volume 18. JF - EPA number: 100143, 422 pages and maps, April 16, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cemeteries KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16373907?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NC+24+FROM+2.8+MILES+EAST+OF+I-95+TO+I-40%2C+CUMBERLAND%2C+SAMPSON%2C+AND+DUPLIN+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=NC+24+FROM+2.8+MILES+EAST+OF+I-95+TO+I-40%2C+CUMBERLAND%2C+SAMPSON%2C+AND+DUPLIN+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 127/SR 28 IMPROVEMENTS, FROM I-40 AT CROSSVILLE TO STATE ROUTE 62 AT CLARKRANGE, CUMBERLAND AND FENTRESS COUNTIES, TENNESSEE. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - US 127/SR 28 IMPROVEMENTS, FROM I-40 AT CROSSVILLE TO STATE ROUTE 62 AT CLARKRANGE, CUMBERLAND AND FENTRESS COUNTIES, TENNESSEE. AN - 756827286; 14285-100134_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The upgrading of a 14.1-mile section of US 127 (State Route (SR) 28) from Interstate 40 (I-40) in Crossville northward to the intersection of US 127 and SR 62 in Clarkrange, Cumberland and Fentress counties, Tennessee is proposed. US 127 is a major north-south arterial extending from the Georgia state line north through the eastern section of central Tennessee to the Kentucky state line. The study area lacks local and regional access to I-40. The existing US 127 roadway design exhibits numerous deficiencies and capacity problems which have resulted in a high number of crashes along the highway. Recent increases in traffic volume have resulted in a significant decline in level of service, and traffic volumes are anticipated to increases at an even greater rate in the future. Problems moving persons and goods along the corridor have limited local and regional economic growth potentials. The proposed action would upgrade the highway within the study corridor to a four- and five-lane highway. The cross-section for the four-lane roadway would consist of two 12-foot travel lanes in each direction with 12-foot outside shoulders, six-foot inside shoulders, and a 48-foot depressed median within a 250-foot right-of-way. The typical section for the five-lane roadway would consist of two 12-foot travel lanes in each direction, a 12-foot center turn lane, and 12-foot outside shoulders within a 200-foot right-of-way. This final EIS presents the proposed action with three alignment options and a No Action Alternative for comparison. Construction, rights-off-way acquisition, and utilities relocations costs under the preferred alternative are estimated at $241 million, $31.9 million, and $12 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve safety for vehicular travel and pedestrian movements, reduce travel delays for through traffic, enhance regional and local economic development opportunities, and improve transportation linkages in the Upper Cumberland Region of Tennessee. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 442 acres of new rights-of-way would result in the displacement of 100 residences, 13 businesses, and two community service facilities, as well as 442 acres of farmland, including 104 acres of prime or unique farmland, 4.7 acres of ponds, 2,652 linear feet of perennial stream channel, 6,067 linear feet of intermittent stream channel, 1,836 linear feet of wet weather conveyances, two seeps, two springs, and 4.6 acres of wetlands. The project would include the construction of a bridge across Clear Creek, which is federally designated habitat for the spotfin chub, a federally protected species. Construction workers would encounter 45 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0474D, Volume 31, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100134, 280 pages and maps, April 12, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Economic Assessments KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Fish KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Tennessee KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827286?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+127%2FSR+28+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+FROM+I-40+AT+CROSSVILLE+TO+STATE+ROUTE+62+AT+CLARKRANGE%2C+CUMBERLAND+AND+FENTRESS+COUNTIES%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.title=US+127%2FSR+28+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+FROM+I-40+AT+CROSSVILLE+TO+STATE+ROUTE+62+AT+CLARKRANGE%2C+CUMBERLAND+AND+FENTRESS+COUNTIES%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Nashville, Tennessee; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 127/SR 28 IMPROVEMENTS, FROM I-40 AT CROSSVILLE TO STATE ROUTE 62 AT CLARKRANGE, CUMBERLAND AND FENTRESS COUNTIES, TENNESSEE. AN - 754908976; 14285 AB - PURPOSE: The upgrading of a 14.1-mile section of US 127 (State Route (SR) 28) from Interstate 40 (I-40) in Crossville northward to the intersection of US 127 and SR 62 in Clarkrange, Cumberland and Fentress counties, Tennessee is proposed. US 127 is a major north-south arterial extending from the Georgia state line north through the eastern section of central Tennessee to the Kentucky state line. The study area lacks local and regional access to I-40. The existing US 127 roadway design exhibits numerous deficiencies and capacity problems which have resulted in a high number of crashes along the highway. Recent increases in traffic volume have resulted in a significant decline in level of service, and traffic volumes are anticipated to increases at an even greater rate in the future. Problems moving persons and goods along the corridor have limited local and regional economic growth potentials. The proposed action would upgrade the highway within the study corridor to a four- and five-lane highway. The cross-section for the four-lane roadway would consist of two 12-foot travel lanes in each direction with 12-foot outside shoulders, six-foot inside shoulders, and a 48-foot depressed median within a 250-foot right-of-way. The typical section for the five-lane roadway would consist of two 12-foot travel lanes in each direction, a 12-foot center turn lane, and 12-foot outside shoulders within a 200-foot right-of-way. This final EIS presents the proposed action with three alignment options and a No Action Alternative for comparison. Construction, rights-off-way acquisition, and utilities relocations costs under the preferred alternative are estimated at $241 million, $31.9 million, and $12 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would improve safety for vehicular travel and pedestrian movements, reduce travel delays for through traffic, enhance regional and local economic development opportunities, and improve transportation linkages in the Upper Cumberland Region of Tennessee. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 442 acres of new rights-of-way would result in the displacement of 100 residences, 13 businesses, and two community service facilities, as well as 442 acres of farmland, including 104 acres of prime or unique farmland, 4.7 acres of ponds, 2,652 linear feet of perennial stream channel, 6,067 linear feet of intermittent stream channel, 1,836 linear feet of wet weather conveyances, two seeps, two springs, and 4.6 acres of wetlands. The project would include the construction of a bridge across Clear Creek, which is federally designated habitat for the spotfin chub, a federally protected species. Construction workers would encounter 45 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0474D, Volume 31, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100134, 280 pages and maps, April 12, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Economic Assessments KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Fish KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Tennessee KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908976?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+127%2FSR+28+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+FROM+I-40+AT+CROSSVILLE+TO+STATE+ROUTE+62+AT+CLARKRANGE%2C+CUMBERLAND+AND+FENTRESS+COUNTIES%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.title=US+127%2FSR+28+IMPROVEMENTS%2C+FROM+I-40+AT+CROSSVILLE+TO+STATE+ROUTE+62+AT+CLARKRANGE%2C+CUMBERLAND+AND+FENTRESS+COUNTIES%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Nashville, Tennessee; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Resistivity Imaging at MN/DOT: Building Bridges in Duluth T2 - 2010 Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Environmental and Engineering Problems (SAGEEP 2010) AN - 754215689; 5770548 JF - 2010 Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Environmental and Engineering Problems (SAGEEP 2010) AU - Richter, Jason Y1 - 2010/04/11/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Apr 11 KW - USA, Minnesota, Duluth KW - Bridges KW - Imaging techniques KW - Manganese KW - U 5500:Geoscience UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754215689?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2010+Symposium+on+the+Application+of+Geophysics+to+Environmental+and+Engineering+Problems+%28SAGEEP+2010%29&rft.atitle=Resistivity+Imaging+at+MN%2FDOT%3A+Building+Bridges+in+Duluth&rft.au=Richter%2C+Jason&rft.aulast=Richter&rft.aufirst=Jason&rft.date=2010-04-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2010+Symposium+on+the+Application+of+Geophysics+to+Environmental+and+Engineering+Problems+%28SAGEEP+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.eegs.org/pdf_files/SageepSchedule_3.26.10.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 66 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876255106; 14284-3_0066 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 66 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255106?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 40 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876255081; 14284-3_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255081?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 34 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876255068; 14284-3_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876255068?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 10 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254735; 14284-3_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254735?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 9 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254732; 14284-3_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254732?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 1 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254729; 14284-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254729?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 95 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254701; 14284-3_0095 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 95 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254701?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 83 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254674; 14284-3_0083 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 83 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254674?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 31 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254496; 14284-3_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254496?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 5 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254485; 14284-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254485?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 4 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254473; 14284-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254473?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 48 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254384; 14284-3_0048 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 48 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254384?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 35 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254373; 14284-3_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254373?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 97 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254009; 14284-3_0097 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 97 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254009?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 96 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254008; 14284-3_0096 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 96 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254008?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 89 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254006; 14284-3_0089 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 89 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254006?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 30 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254003; 14284-3_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254003?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 28 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254002; 14284-3_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254002?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 27 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876254001; 14284-3_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254001?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 94 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876253260; 14284-3_0094 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 94 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876253260?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 88 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876252699; 14284-3_0088 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 88 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252699?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 87 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876252698; 14284-3_0087 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 87 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252698?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 82 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876252697; 14284-3_0082 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 82 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252697?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 78 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876252696; 14284-3_0078 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 78 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252696?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 91 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876252410; 14284-3_0091 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 91 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252410?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 86 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876252393; 14284-3_0086 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 86 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252393?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 85 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876252366; 14284-3_0085 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 85 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252366?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 77 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876252331; 14284-3_0077 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 77 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252331?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 52 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251823; 14284-3_0052 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 52 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251823?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 38 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251806; 14284-3_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251806?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 26 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251792; 14284-3_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251792?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 19 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251791; 14284-3_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251791?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 18 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251790; 14284-3_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251790?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 15 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251789; 14284-3_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251789?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 32 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251125; 14284-3_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251125?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 29 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251119; 14284-3_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251119?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 21 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251112; 14284-3_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251112?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 20 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251107; 14284-3_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251107?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 13 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251004; 14284-3_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251004?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 12 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251003; 14284-3_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251003?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 7 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251001; 14284-3_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251001?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 6 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876251000; 14284-3_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251000?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 74 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876249117; 14284-3_0074 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 74 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876249117?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 57 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876249098; 14284-3_0057 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 57 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876249098?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 44 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876249047; 14284-3_0044 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876249047?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 37 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876248970; 14284-3_0037 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876248970?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 72 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876248876; 14284-3_0072 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 72 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876248876?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 71 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876248871; 14284-3_0071 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 71 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876248871?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 46 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876248866; 14284-3_0046 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876248866?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 45 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876248861; 14284-3_0045 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 45 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876248861?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 23 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876248379; 14284-3_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876248379?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 22 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876248371; 14284-3_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876248371?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=Frontiers+in+Psychiatry&rft.issn=1664-0640&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 68 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876246500; 14284-3_0068 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 68 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876246500?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 65 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876246484; 14284-3_0065 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 65 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876246484?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 60 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876246476; 14284-3_0060 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 60 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876246476?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 59 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876246465; 14284-3_0059 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 59 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876246465?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 98 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876246371; 14284-3_0098 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 98 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876246371?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 61 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876245189; 14284-3_0061 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 61 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876245189?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 63 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876245124; 14284-3_0063 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 63 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876245124?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 62 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876245109; 14284-3_0062 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 62 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876245109?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. [Part 17 of 98] T2 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 876244832; 14284-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876244832?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827464; 14281-100130_0008 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827464?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827461; 14281-100130_0007 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827461?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827457; 14281-100130_0006 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827457?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILVER STATE SOLAR ENERGY PROJECT, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - SILVER STATE SOLAR ENERGY PROJECT, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA. AN - 756827444; 14280-100129_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 400-megawatt (MW) photovoltaic solar plant and associated facilities on public lands in southern Clark County, Nevada are proposed. NextLight Renewable Power, LLC has applied for a right-of-way grant form the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to construct the Silver State Solar Project on a site in Primm Valley, 40 miles south of Las Vegas and two miles southeast of Primm. The proposed project would be built in three phases: Phase I, consisting of a 60MW solar plant and associated facilities; Phase II, a 140MW plant and facilities; and Phase III, the remaining solar panels and infrastructure. The concentrated solar thermal parabolic trough power plant facility would operate for approximately 50 years. The solar field and infrastructure would consist of single-axis tracker systems or fixed panels, an underground and overhead electrical power collection system, two step-up transformers, 230-kilovolt (kV) and 220kV transmission lines, a 3.6-acre operation and maintenance area, switchyard, paved access and maintenance roads, flood and drainage controls and a fire break. Key issues identified during scoping included those related to the energy market, air quality and fugitive dust, water resources, vegetation and wildlife, the Mojave National Preserve, off-highway vehicle recreation, cultural and historic resources, and visual resources. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative 2, the proposed action and BLM's preferred alternative, up to 2,967 acres of land would be disturbed and berms would be used to reduce erosion. Implementation of Alternative 3, the modified site layout alternative, would disturb up to 4,818 acres of land and would employ an alternate drainage and flood control design to control erosion. These acreages include temporary disturbance during construction. Permanent disturbance would be 2,863 and 3,216 acres, respectively. Both action alternatives would use solar PV technology, although the specific types of arrays and trackers have not been determined at this time. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the utility scale solar project at the proposed site would take advantage of Nevada's solar resource, allow direct interconnection with both the Nevada and California transmission systems, and help to meet federal requirements to use public lands for renewable energy development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the proposed action, project facilities would disturb 2,967 acres and localized wind-driven soil erosion could occur. Native vegetation, including cacti and yucca species would be adversely affected. Construction would contribute to unavoidable habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation. Planned projects in the area, including the proposed project, would eliminate up to 106,065 acres of suitable desert tortoise habitat. Proposed renewable energy projects and transmission/pipeline projects that would be constructed during the timeframe of the proposed project would collectively occupy 20,000 acres of land and would significantly restrict recreational activities. After implementation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would remain visible on the landscape. LEGAL MANDATES: Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58) and Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100129, 560 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: BLM/NV/LV/ES-10/21+1793 KW - Desert Land KW - Drainage KW - Electric Generators KW - Electric Power KW - Emissions KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Erosion KW - Erosion Control KW - Flood Control KW - Industrial Water KW - Power Plants KW - Solar Energy KW - Transmission Lines KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mojave Desert KW - Nevada KW - Energy Policy Act of 2005, Compliance KW - Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827444?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILVER+STATE+SOLAR+ENERGY+PROJECT%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=SILVER+STATE+SOLAR+ENERGY+PROJECT%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Las Vegas, Nevada; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827416; 14281-100130_0005 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827416?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827325; 14281-100130_0003 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827325?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827279; 14281-100130_0004 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827279?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827261; 14281-100130_0001 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827261?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827253; 14281-100130_0002 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827253?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827180; 14281-100130_0010 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827180?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827160; 14281-100130_0011 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827160?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 11] T2 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 756827154; 14281-100130_0009 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827154?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILVER STATE SOLAR ENERGY PROJECT, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - SILVER STATE SOLAR ENERGY PROJECT, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA. AN - 756827084; 14280-100129_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 400-megawatt (MW) photovoltaic solar plant and associated facilities on public lands in southern Clark County, Nevada are proposed. NextLight Renewable Power, LLC has applied for a right-of-way grant form the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to construct the Silver State Solar Project on a site in Primm Valley, 40 miles south of Las Vegas and two miles southeast of Primm. The proposed project would be built in three phases: Phase I, consisting of a 60MW solar plant and associated facilities; Phase II, a 140MW plant and facilities; and Phase III, the remaining solar panels and infrastructure. The concentrated solar thermal parabolic trough power plant facility would operate for approximately 50 years. The solar field and infrastructure would consist of single-axis tracker systems or fixed panels, an underground and overhead electrical power collection system, two step-up transformers, 230-kilovolt (kV) and 220kV transmission lines, a 3.6-acre operation and maintenance area, switchyard, paved access and maintenance roads, flood and drainage controls and a fire break. Key issues identified during scoping included those related to the energy market, air quality and fugitive dust, water resources, vegetation and wildlife, the Mojave National Preserve, off-highway vehicle recreation, cultural and historic resources, and visual resources. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative 2, the proposed action and BLM's preferred alternative, up to 2,967 acres of land would be disturbed and berms would be used to reduce erosion. Implementation of Alternative 3, the modified site layout alternative, would disturb up to 4,818 acres of land and would employ an alternate drainage and flood control design to control erosion. These acreages include temporary disturbance during construction. Permanent disturbance would be 2,863 and 3,216 acres, respectively. Both action alternatives would use solar PV technology, although the specific types of arrays and trackers have not been determined at this time. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the utility scale solar project at the proposed site would take advantage of Nevada's solar resource, allow direct interconnection with both the Nevada and California transmission systems, and help to meet federal requirements to use public lands for renewable energy development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the proposed action, project facilities would disturb 2,967 acres and localized wind-driven soil erosion could occur. Native vegetation, including cacti and yucca species would be adversely affected. Construction would contribute to unavoidable habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation. Planned projects in the area, including the proposed project, would eliminate up to 106,065 acres of suitable desert tortoise habitat. Proposed renewable energy projects and transmission/pipeline projects that would be constructed during the timeframe of the proposed project would collectively occupy 20,000 acres of land and would significantly restrict recreational activities. After implementation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would remain visible on the landscape. LEGAL MANDATES: Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58) and Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100129, 560 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: BLM/NV/LV/ES-10/21+1793 KW - Desert Land KW - Drainage KW - Electric Generators KW - Electric Power KW - Emissions KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Erosion KW - Erosion Control KW - Flood Control KW - Industrial Water KW - Power Plants KW - Solar Energy KW - Transmission Lines KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mojave Desert KW - Nevada KW - Energy Policy Act of 2005, Compliance KW - Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827084?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILVER+STATE+SOLAR+ENERGY+PROJECT%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=SILVER+STATE+SOLAR+ENERGY+PROJECT%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Las Vegas, Nevada; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDOR, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 16374235; 14281 AB - PURPOSE: An extension of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system service in the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor (SVRTC) beyond the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont, California is proposed. The SVRTC is severely congested and extends over 20 miles from the City of Fremont in southwestern Alameda County through the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County, covering approximately 100 square miles. Key issues include traffic, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise and vibration. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The two Build Alternatives are dependent on the completion of the BART Warm Springs Extension Project. The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Project (SVRTP) Alternative would consist of a 16.1 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through the city of Milpitas to south of Marbury Road in San Jose. The extension would then descend into a 5.1 mile-long subway tunnel, continue through downtown San Jose, and terminate in Santa Clara near the Caltrain Station. Six stations would be constructed (Milpitas, Berryessa, Alum Rock, Downtown San Jose, Dirdon/Arena, and Santa Clara) and a maintenance and vehicle storage yard would be constructed at the terminus in Santa Clara. Passenger service for the SVRTP Alternative would start in 2018 and ridership is projected to be approximately 98,750 by 2030. The Berryessa Extension Project (BEP) Alternative, which is the recommended project, would consist of a 9.9 mile extension of the BART system beginning at the approved BART Warm Springs Station in Fremont and proceeding on the former Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way through Milpitas to near Las Plumas Avenue in San Jose. Two stations would be constructed (Milpitas and Berryess) and passenger service would start in 2018 with ridership projected to be approximately 46,450 in 2030. Two Santa Clara County voter-approved tax spending measures, supplemented by $750 million in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding and $240 million in state of California funds, would form the the foundation for the capital and operating financial plan for the proposed BEP and SVRTP alternatives. Capital costs for the BEP Alternative would be $2.1 billion in 2008 dollars or $2.5 billion in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars. Operating and maintenance costs would include net costs for non-BART service of $415.8 million in 2008 dollars or $941.1 million in YOE dollars and net costs of BART service of $47.2 million in 2008 dollars or $87.7 million in YOE dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would provide a new link in the regional rail network and direct access to the central business district of the region's largest city, San Jose, and into the core employment area of Silcon Valley. Improved transit in the SVRTC would be consistent with plans and policies established by the cities of Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara for transit-oriented development and would improve regional air quality by reducing auto emissions. Overall energy use would be reduced by an estimated 400 billion BTUs. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Up to 1.4 acres of riparian forest along Upper Penitencia Creek would be affected by the design of the Berryessa Station. Approximately 0.56 acres of wetlands would be affected by right-of-way drainage improvements. Construction would have potential impact to burrowing owls, nesting raptors and swallows, roosting bats, red-legged frogs and western pond turtles. The number of noise and vibration severe impacts would be 140 to152 residential units and approximately 425 residents would remain exposed to excessive noise. A total of 49 to 54 businesses, two residential units, and up to three community facilities would be displaced. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0188D, Volume 33, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100130, Final EIS--1,451 pages, Appendices--521 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Birds KW - Cultural Resources KW - Emissions KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Tunnels (Railroads) KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - California KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16374235?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SILICON+VALLEY+RAPID+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR%2C+SANTA+CLARA+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR - 35, OKLAHOMA-MEXICO/GULF COAST ELEMENT, TEXAS. AN - 16372115; 14284 AB - PURPOSE: The development of the Trans-Texas Corridor 35 (TTC-35), extending across Texas from the Oklahoma state line, north of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, to the Mexico international border and/or the Gulf Coast, is proposed. TTC-35 would be a major component of the overall TTC system, which is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that would incorporate existing and new highways, railways, and utility rights-of-way into an integrated system. Utilities to be accommodated would include water supply lines, oil and natural gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband telecommunications, and other telecommunications services. This system would help accommodate economic and population growth in the vicinity of the corridor; growth of 145 percent is expected within the region served by the corridor between 2000 and 2060. Current traffic volumes for most segments of the interstate system serving the corridor exceed design capacity and demands being placed on related highways and railroads are outpacing new construction plans. The TTC-35 multimodal corridor would ultimately include two separate lanes for trucks and three separate lanes for passenger vehicles in each direction, six rail lines, with one in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail and freight rail, and a 200-foot-wide utility zone, all within a 1,200-foot right-of-way. TTC-35 would be completed in phases over 50 years based on transportation needs. This tier one final EIS considers a No Action Alternative and 12 reasonable corridor alternatives, ranging from four to 18 miles in width. Comments and concerns during circulation of the tier one draft EIS focused on potential land acquisitions and negative impact to property values in the project area. The No Action alternative is recommended as the preferred alternative because the magnitude of potential impact would be unprecedented. Considerations include: the size of the study area (400 to 500 miles in length and 5,000 to 6,000 square miles in area); the number of potentially affected people (approximately one million); and the 50-year development time frame of the project. POSITIVE IMPACTS: TCC-35 would improve the international, interstate, and intrastate movement of goods and people; address anticipated transportation needs of Texas along the Interstate 35 (I-35) corridor for the next 20 to 50 years; and sustain and enhance the economic vitality of the state. The TCC system would provide numerous options and intermodal connections to freight operators and passengers. Poor safety and service statistics on the I-35 corridor would be reversed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way development would displace residential and commercial developments, parkland, historic districts and sites and archaeologic sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, oil and natural gas well sites and other potential and active mineral extraction sites, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, habitat for federally protected species of plants and animals, landfills, farmland, stream channel segments and floodplains, reservoir storage capacity, and wetlands. Minority and/or low-income populations along the corridor would be disproportionately affected by TCC developments in some areas. The corridor would traverse nonattainment zones for criterion air pollutants in some areas, further degrading air quality in these areas. The corridor would traverse aquifers, potentially threatening groundwater quality used for human water supplies. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0412D, Volume 30, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100133, Four Volumes on CD-ROM, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-05-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Communication Systems KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Landfills KW - Mineral Resources KW - Minorities KW - Natural Gas KW - Oil Production KW - Parks KW - Pipelines KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Reservoirs KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16372115?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=TRANS-TEXAS+CORRIDOR+-+35%2C+OKLAHOMA-MEXICO%2FGULF+COAST+ELEMENT%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SILVER STATE SOLAR ENERGY PROJECT, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA. AN - 16368686; 14280 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 400-megawatt (MW) photovoltaic solar plant and associated facilities on public lands in southern Clark County, Nevada are proposed. NextLight Renewable Power, LLC has applied for a right-of-way grant form the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to construct the Silver State Solar Project on a site in Primm Valley, 40 miles south of Las Vegas and two miles southeast of Primm. The proposed project would be built in three phases: Phase I, consisting of a 60MW solar plant and associated facilities; Phase II, a 140MW plant and facilities; and Phase III, the remaining solar panels and infrastructure. The concentrated solar thermal parabolic trough power plant facility would operate for approximately 50 years. The solar field and infrastructure would consist of single-axis tracker systems or fixed panels, an underground and overhead electrical power collection system, two step-up transformers, 230-kilovolt (kV) and 220kV transmission lines, a 3.6-acre operation and maintenance area, switchyard, paved access and maintenance roads, flood and drainage controls and a fire break. Key issues identified during scoping included those related to the energy market, air quality and fugitive dust, water resources, vegetation and wildlife, the Mojave National Preserve, off-highway vehicle recreation, cultural and historic resources, and visual resources. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are analyzed in this draft EIS. Under Alternative 2, the proposed action and BLM's preferred alternative, up to 2,967 acres of land would be disturbed and berms would be used to reduce erosion. Implementation of Alternative 3, the modified site layout alternative, would disturb up to 4,818 acres of land and would employ an alternate drainage and flood control design to control erosion. These acreages include temporary disturbance during construction. Permanent disturbance would be 2,863 and 3,216 acres, respectively. Both action alternatives would use solar PV technology, although the specific types of arrays and trackers have not been determined at this time. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the utility scale solar project at the proposed site would take advantage of Nevada's solar resource, allow direct interconnection with both the Nevada and California transmission systems, and help to meet federal requirements to use public lands for renewable energy development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the proposed action, project facilities would disturb 2,967 acres and localized wind-driven soil erosion could occur. Native vegetation, including cacti and yucca species would be adversely affected. Construction would contribute to unavoidable habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation. Planned projects in the area, including the proposed project, would eliminate up to 106,065 acres of suitable desert tortoise habitat. Proposed renewable energy projects and transmission/pipeline projects that would be constructed during the timeframe of the proposed project would collectively occupy 20,000 acres of land and would significantly restrict recreational activities. After implementation of mitigation measures, the proposed project would remain visible on the landscape. LEGAL MANDATES: Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58) and Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100129, 560 pages, April 9, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: BLM/NV/LV/ES-10/21+1793 KW - Desert Land KW - Drainage KW - Electric Generators KW - Electric Power KW - Emissions KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Erosion KW - Erosion Control KW - Flood Control KW - Industrial Water KW - Power Plants KW - Solar Energy KW - Transmission Lines KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Mojave Desert KW - Nevada KW - Energy Policy Act of 2005, Compliance KW - Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16368686?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SILVER+STATE+SOLAR+ENERGY+PROJECT%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA.&rft.title=SILVER+STATE+SOLAR+ENERGY+PROJECT%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Las Vegas, Nevada; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 13 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130484; 14274-3_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130484?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 12 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130474; 14274-3_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130474?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 21 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130328; 14274-3_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130328?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 7 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130315; 14274-3_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130315?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 6 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130301; 14274-3_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130301?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 5 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130285; 14274-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130285?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 4 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130269; 14274-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130269?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 34 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130256; 14274-3_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130256?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 3 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130255; 14274-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130255?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 33 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130241; 14274-3_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130241?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 32 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130228; 14274-3_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130228?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 31 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130211; 14274-3_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130211?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 22 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873130193; 14274-3_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130193?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 11 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873129994; 14274-3_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129994?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 10 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873129973; 14274-3_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129973?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 30 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873129965; 14274-3_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129965?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 29 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873129952; 14274-3_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129952?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 28 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873129940; 14274-3_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129940?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 27 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873129931; 14274-3_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129931?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 26 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873129916; 14274-3_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129916?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 25 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873129889; 14274-3_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129889?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 15 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873128813; 14274-3_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128813?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 2 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873128774; 14274-3_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128774?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 20 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873128763; 14274-3_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128763?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 19 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873128750; 14274-3_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128750?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 24 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873128459; 14274-3_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128459?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 23 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873128438; 14274-3_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128438?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 9 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873128420; 14274-3_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128420?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 8 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873128414; 14274-3_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128414?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 14 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873127836; 14274-3_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127836?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 1 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873127759; 14274-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127759?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 18 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873127680; 14274-3_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127680?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 17 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873127675; 14274-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127675?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 16 of 34] T2 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 873127670; 14274-3_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127670?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 290 CORRIDOR, FROM FARM-TO-MARKET (FM) 2920 TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY (IH) 610, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 16379111; 14274 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of highway improvements within the US 290 corridor in northwest Harris County, Texas is proposed. The study corridor extends approximately 38 miles from the US 290/Interstate 610 (I-610)/I-10 interchange in Houston northwest to Farm-to-Market (FM) 2920 near the community of Waller. US 290 replaced Hempstead Road as the primary travel route in the northwestern portion of Houston. However, Hempstead Road continues to be used to service businesses and residences locally from I-610 to Beltway 8. US 290 and Hempstead Road are severely congested, particularly during peak travel times, and the roadways do not meet design standards. The proposed project would include Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8. In general, the project would include provision of additional general purpose lanes on US 290 and reconstruction of US 290 frontage roads; construction of a managed lane facility along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8, continuing along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/State Highway (SH) 99; construction of frontage roads (Hempstead Road) adjacent to managed lanes from I-610 to Beltway 8; provision of direct connectors from US 290 and the managed lanes to I-610 and I-10; provision of a reserved high-capacity transit corridor along Hempstead Road from I-610 to Beltway 8 and along US 290 from Beltway 8 to the future Grand Parkway/SH 99. In addition to the proposed action and a No Build Alternative, alternatives considered include various transportation modal configurations along US 290, Hempstead Road, and the I-610 interchange and various alignment alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement would provide an integrated transportation system that would reduce traffic congestion in the US 290 corridor, improve levels of service and mobility on US 290 and Hempstead Road, bring the roadway facilities up to current design standards, and improve safety in the US 290 corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would convert 780 acres of land to roadway right-of-way. The preferred alternative would displace 87 single-family residences and 225 multifamily residences on US 290, 49 single-family residences on Hempstead Road, three churches, pipeline facilities, a United States Army Reserve Center, several businesses, and portions of undeveloped land. Approximately 18.6 acres of jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, would be impacted. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at some sensitive receptor sites. Hazardous waste sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0269D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100123, Volume I--444 pages and maps, Volume II--Maps and Exhibits Supplement (Oversize), Volume III, Public Comment and Response--543 pages, April 7, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-TX-EIS-07-01-F KW - Community Facilities KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Pipelines KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Texas KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16379111?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=US+290+CORRIDOR%2C+FROM+FARM-TO-MARKET+%28FM%29+2920+TO+INTERSTATE+HIGHWAY+%28IH%29+610%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Austin, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-22 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: April 7, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MID-CURRITUCK BRIDGE STUDY, CURRITUCK AND DARE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 4 of 4] T2 - MID-CURRITUCK BRIDGE STUDY, CURRITUCK AND DARE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873131917; 14211-6_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements, with focus on the consideration of a new bridge across Currituck Sound from the mainland to the Outer Banks, Currituck and Dare counties, North Carolina, are proposed. The project area encompasses US 158 between its intersection with NC 168 and its intersection with NC 12, and NC 12 from its intersection with US 158 north to where it terminates in the community of Corolla. Key issues identified during scoping focused on traffic improvement benefits, hurricane clearance times, capital costs, potential impacts to communities and natural resources, and potential economic impacts. Comments also focused on tolling as a financing tool and on pedestrian and bicycle access or accommodations. Six alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. The Existing Roads Alternative (ER2) would widen the existing US 158 and NC 12, but would not include a bridge. Four bridge alternatives would include a Mid-Currituck Bridge and different amounts of improvements to the existing US 158 and NC 12. The recommended alternative, MCB4, would include a new bridge facility across the Currituck Sound and minor improvements to existing NC 12 and US 158, but does not specify where the bridge would intersect NC 12. Two options for this connection include a northern alignment close to the Corolla Bay subdivision, known as C1, and a southern alignment south of the TimBuck II Shopping Center, known as C2. Two options are also identified for the location of the toll plaza and for the facility to be constructed across Maple Swamp. Option A includes a bridge across Maple Swamp and locating a toll plaza at a proposed interchange at US 158. Option B involves placing a new road through Maple Swamp with a toll plaza closer to Currituck Sound. For the five build alternatives, two hurricane evacuation options are under consideration. The first option is to add a third outbound lane to US 158 for evacuation use only. The second option is to reverse the existing center turn lane on US 158 to create a third outbound lane during an evacuation. When a third outbound lane is needed on the Wright Memorial Bridge or Knapp (Intracoastal Waterway) Bridge, one existing inbound lane would be reversed. Estimated cost of the recommended alternative ranges from $601 million to $816 million depending on alignment and options. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed project would substantially improve traffic flow on US 158 and NC 12 and reduce travel time between the Currituck County mainland and the Currituck County Outer Banks. Evacuation times from the Outer Banks for residents and visitors who use US 158 and NC 168 as an evacuation route would also be substantially reduced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause increased turbidity in waters of Currituck Sound. New impervious surface of 80 to 87 acres would increase levels of bridge and highway runoff. Required relocations would include five to seven residences, three to six businesses, and 19 to 36 gravesites. Total wetland impacts would range from 34 to 41 acres. Bridge features would affect views of Currituck Sound. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100116, Draft EIS--237 pages, Technical Reports/Supplemental Materials, CD-ROM, April 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hurricane Readiness Plans KW - Hurricanes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131917?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MID-CURRITUCK+BRIDGE+STUDY%2C+CURRITUCK+AND+DARE+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MID-CURRITUCK+BRIDGE+STUDY%2C+CURRITUCK+AND+DARE+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MID-CURRITUCK BRIDGE STUDY, CURRITUCK AND DARE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 3 of 4] T2 - MID-CURRITUCK BRIDGE STUDY, CURRITUCK AND DARE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130275; 14211-6_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements, with focus on the consideration of a new bridge across Currituck Sound from the mainland to the Outer Banks, Currituck and Dare counties, North Carolina, are proposed. The project area encompasses US 158 between its intersection with NC 168 and its intersection with NC 12, and NC 12 from its intersection with US 158 north to where it terminates in the community of Corolla. Key issues identified during scoping focused on traffic improvement benefits, hurricane clearance times, capital costs, potential impacts to communities and natural resources, and potential economic impacts. Comments also focused on tolling as a financing tool and on pedestrian and bicycle access or accommodations. Six alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. The Existing Roads Alternative (ER2) would widen the existing US 158 and NC 12, but would not include a bridge. Four bridge alternatives would include a Mid-Currituck Bridge and different amounts of improvements to the existing US 158 and NC 12. The recommended alternative, MCB4, would include a new bridge facility across the Currituck Sound and minor improvements to existing NC 12 and US 158, but does not specify where the bridge would intersect NC 12. Two options for this connection include a northern alignment close to the Corolla Bay subdivision, known as C1, and a southern alignment south of the TimBuck II Shopping Center, known as C2. Two options are also identified for the location of the toll plaza and for the facility to be constructed across Maple Swamp. Option A includes a bridge across Maple Swamp and locating a toll plaza at a proposed interchange at US 158. Option B involves placing a new road through Maple Swamp with a toll plaza closer to Currituck Sound. For the five build alternatives, two hurricane evacuation options are under consideration. The first option is to add a third outbound lane to US 158 for evacuation use only. The second option is to reverse the existing center turn lane on US 158 to create a third outbound lane during an evacuation. When a third outbound lane is needed on the Wright Memorial Bridge or Knapp (Intracoastal Waterway) Bridge, one existing inbound lane would be reversed. Estimated cost of the recommended alternative ranges from $601 million to $816 million depending on alignment and options. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed project would substantially improve traffic flow on US 158 and NC 12 and reduce travel time between the Currituck County mainland and the Currituck County Outer Banks. Evacuation times from the Outer Banks for residents and visitors who use US 158 and NC 168 as an evacuation route would also be substantially reduced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause increased turbidity in waters of Currituck Sound. New impervious surface of 80 to 87 acres would increase levels of bridge and highway runoff. Required relocations would include five to seven residences, three to six businesses, and 19 to 36 gravesites. Total wetland impacts would range from 34 to 41 acres. Bridge features would affect views of Currituck Sound. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100116, Draft EIS--237 pages, Technical Reports/Supplemental Materials, CD-ROM, April 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hurricane Readiness Plans KW - Hurricanes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130275?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MID-CURRITUCK+BRIDGE+STUDY%2C+CURRITUCK+AND+DARE+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MID-CURRITUCK+BRIDGE+STUDY%2C+CURRITUCK+AND+DARE+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MID-CURRITUCK BRIDGE STUDY, CURRITUCK AND DARE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 2 of 4] T2 - MID-CURRITUCK BRIDGE STUDY, CURRITUCK AND DARE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873130267; 14211-6_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements, with focus on the consideration of a new bridge across Currituck Sound from the mainland to the Outer Banks, Currituck and Dare counties, North Carolina, are proposed. The project area encompasses US 158 between its intersection with NC 168 and its intersection with NC 12, and NC 12 from its intersection with US 158 north to where it terminates in the community of Corolla. Key issues identified during scoping focused on traffic improvement benefits, hurricane clearance times, capital costs, potential impacts to communities and natural resources, and potential economic impacts. Comments also focused on tolling as a financing tool and on pedestrian and bicycle access or accommodations. Six alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. The Existing Roads Alternative (ER2) would widen the existing US 158 and NC 12, but would not include a bridge. Four bridge alternatives would include a Mid-Currituck Bridge and different amounts of improvements to the existing US 158 and NC 12. The recommended alternative, MCB4, would include a new bridge facility across the Currituck Sound and minor improvements to existing NC 12 and US 158, but does not specify where the bridge would intersect NC 12. Two options for this connection include a northern alignment close to the Corolla Bay subdivision, known as C1, and a southern alignment south of the TimBuck II Shopping Center, known as C2. Two options are also identified for the location of the toll plaza and for the facility to be constructed across Maple Swamp. Option A includes a bridge across Maple Swamp and locating a toll plaza at a proposed interchange at US 158. Option B involves placing a new road through Maple Swamp with a toll plaza closer to Currituck Sound. For the five build alternatives, two hurricane evacuation options are under consideration. The first option is to add a third outbound lane to US 158 for evacuation use only. The second option is to reverse the existing center turn lane on US 158 to create a third outbound lane during an evacuation. When a third outbound lane is needed on the Wright Memorial Bridge or Knapp (Intracoastal Waterway) Bridge, one existing inbound lane would be reversed. Estimated cost of the recommended alternative ranges from $601 million to $816 million depending on alignment and options. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed project would substantially improve traffic flow on US 158 and NC 12 and reduce travel time between the Currituck County mainland and the Currituck County Outer Banks. Evacuation times from the Outer Banks for residents and visitors who use US 158 and NC 168 as an evacuation route would also be substantially reduced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause increased turbidity in waters of Currituck Sound. New impervious surface of 80 to 87 acres would increase levels of bridge and highway runoff. Required relocations would include five to seven residences, three to six businesses, and 19 to 36 gravesites. Total wetland impacts would range from 34 to 41 acres. Bridge features would affect views of Currituck Sound. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100116, Draft EIS--237 pages, Technical Reports/Supplemental Materials, CD-ROM, April 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hurricane Readiness Plans KW - Hurricanes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130267?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MID-CURRITUCK+BRIDGE+STUDY%2C+CURRITUCK+AND+DARE+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MID-CURRITUCK+BRIDGE+STUDY%2C+CURRITUCK+AND+DARE+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MID-CURRITUCK BRIDGE STUDY, CURRITUCK AND DARE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 1 of 4] T2 - MID-CURRITUCK BRIDGE STUDY, CURRITUCK AND DARE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 873127829; 14211-6_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements, with focus on the consideration of a new bridge across Currituck Sound from the mainland to the Outer Banks, Currituck and Dare counties, North Carolina, are proposed. The project area encompasses US 158 between its intersection with NC 168 and its intersection with NC 12, and NC 12 from its intersection with US 158 north to where it terminates in the community of Corolla. Key issues identified during scoping focused on traffic improvement benefits, hurricane clearance times, capital costs, potential impacts to communities and natural resources, and potential economic impacts. Comments also focused on tolling as a financing tool and on pedestrian and bicycle access or accommodations. Six alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. The Existing Roads Alternative (ER2) would widen the existing US 158 and NC 12, but would not include a bridge. Four bridge alternatives would include a Mid-Currituck Bridge and different amounts of improvements to the existing US 158 and NC 12. The recommended alternative, MCB4, would include a new bridge facility across the Currituck Sound and minor improvements to existing NC 12 and US 158, but does not specify where the bridge would intersect NC 12. Two options for this connection include a northern alignment close to the Corolla Bay subdivision, known as C1, and a southern alignment south of the TimBuck II Shopping Center, known as C2. Two options are also identified for the location of the toll plaza and for the facility to be constructed across Maple Swamp. Option A includes a bridge across Maple Swamp and locating a toll plaza at a proposed interchange at US 158. Option B involves placing a new road through Maple Swamp with a toll plaza closer to Currituck Sound. For the five build alternatives, two hurricane evacuation options are under consideration. The first option is to add a third outbound lane to US 158 for evacuation use only. The second option is to reverse the existing center turn lane on US 158 to create a third outbound lane during an evacuation. When a third outbound lane is needed on the Wright Memorial Bridge or Knapp (Intracoastal Waterway) Bridge, one existing inbound lane would be reversed. Estimated cost of the recommended alternative ranges from $601 million to $816 million depending on alignment and options. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed project would substantially improve traffic flow on US 158 and NC 12 and reduce travel time between the Currituck County mainland and the Currituck County Outer Banks. Evacuation times from the Outer Banks for residents and visitors who use US 158 and NC 168 as an evacuation route would also be substantially reduced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause increased turbidity in waters of Currituck Sound. New impervious surface of 80 to 87 acres would increase levels of bridge and highway runoff. Required relocations would include five to seven residences, three to six businesses, and 19 to 36 gravesites. Total wetland impacts would range from 34 to 41 acres. Bridge features would affect views of Currituck Sound. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100116, Draft EIS--237 pages, Technical Reports/Supplemental Materials, CD-ROM, April 2, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hurricane Readiness Plans KW - Hurricanes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127829?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MID-CURRITUCK+BRIDGE+STUDY%2C+CURRITUCK+AND+DARE+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MID-CURRITUCK+BRIDGE+STUDY%2C+CURRITUCK+AND+DARE+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - MID-CURRITUCK BRIDGE STUDY, CURRITUCK AND DARE COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 16383731; 14211 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements, with focus on the consideration of a new bridge across Currituck Sound from the mainland to the Outer Banks, Currituck and Dare counties, North Carolina, are proposed. The project area encompasses US 158 between its intersection with NC 168 and its intersection with NC 12, and NC 12 from its intersection with US 158 north to where it terminates in the community of Corolla. Key issues identified during scoping focused on traffic improvement benefits, hurricane clearance times, capital costs, potential impacts to communities and natural resources, and potential economic impacts. Comments also focused on tolling as a financing tool and on pedestrian and bicycle access or accommodations. Six alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. The Existing Roads Alternative (ER2) would widen the existing US 158 and NC 12, but would not include a bridge. Four bridge alternatives would include a Mid-Currituck Bridge and different amounts of improvements to the existing US 158 and NC 12. The recommended alternative, MCB4, would include a new bridge facility across the Currituck Sound and minor improvements to existing NC 12 and US 158, but does not specify where the bridge would intersect NC 12. Two options for this connection include a northern alignment close to the Corolla Bay subdivision, known as C1, and a southern alignment south of the TimBuck II Shopping Center, known as C2. Two options are also identified for the location of the toll plaza and for the facility to be constructed across Maple Swamp. Option A includes a bridge across Maple Swamp and locating a toll plaza at a proposed interchange at US 158. Option B involves placing a new road through Maple Swamp with a toll plaza closer to Currituck Sound. For the five build alternatives, two hurricane evacuation options are under consideration. The first option is to add a third outbound lane to US 158 for evacuation use only. The second option is to reverse the existing center turn lane on US 158 to create a third outbound lane during an evacuation. When a third outbound lane is needed on the Wright Memorial Bridge or Knapp (Intracoastal Waterway) Bridge, one existing inbound lane would be reversed. Estimated cost of the recommended alternative ranges from $601 million to $816 million depending on alignment and options. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed project would substantially improve traffic flow on US 158 and NC 12 and reduce travel time between the Currituck County mainland and the Currituck County Outer Banks. Evacuation times from the Outer Banks for residents and visitors who use US 158 and NC 168 as an evacuation route would also be substantially reduced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause increased turbidity in waters of Currituck Sound. New impervious surface of 80 to 87 acres would increase levels of bridge and highway runoff. Required relocations would include five to seven residences, three to six businesses, and 19 to 36 gravesites. Total wetland impacts would range from 34 to 41 acres. Bridge features would affect views of Currituck Sound. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100116, Draft EIS--237 pages, Technical Reports/Supplemental Materials, CD-ROM, April 2, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-NC-EIS-10-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hurricane Readiness Plans KW - Hurricanes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16383731?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-04-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=MID-CURRITUCK+BRIDGE+STUDY%2C+CURRITUCK+AND+DARE+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=MID-CURRITUCK+BRIDGE+STUDY%2C+CURRITUCK+AND+DARE+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Raleigh, North Carolina; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: April 2, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Resistivity imaging at Mn/DOT; "building bridges" in Duluth AN - 928894514; 2012-028763 JF - Proceedings of SAGEEP AU - Richter, Jason L AU - Labson, Vic Y1 - 2010/04// PY - 2010 DA - April 2010 SP - 894 EP - 904 PB - Environmental and Engineering Geophysical Society, Denver, CO VL - 2010 KW - United States KW - Minnesota KW - imagery KW - geophysical surveys KW - site exploration KW - Duluth Minnesota KW - geophysical methods KW - electrical methods KW - resistivity KW - Saint Louis County Minnesota KW - foundations KW - surveys KW - bridges KW - construction KW - 30:Engineering geology KW - 20:Applied geophysics UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928894514?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Proceedings+of+SAGEEP&rft.atitle=Resistivity+imaging+at+Mn%2FDOT%3B+%22building+bridges%22+in+Duluth&rft.au=Richter%2C+Jason+L%3BLabson%2C+Vic&rft.aulast=Richter&rft.aufirst=Jason&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=2010&rft.issue=&rft.spage=894&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Proceedings+of+SAGEEP&rft.issn=1554-8015&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://scitation.aip.org/sageep/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - 2010 EEGS annual meeting; 23rd SAGEEP (symposium on the application of geophysics to engineering and environmental problems); Building new markets for geophysics N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - PubXState - CO N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. sects., sketch map N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - bridges; construction; Duluth Minnesota; electrical methods; foundations; geophysical methods; geophysical surveys; imagery; Minnesota; resistivity; Saint Louis County Minnesota; site exploration; surveys; United States ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Geologic influences on guerrilla tactics in the prairies and hills of southern Missouri during the Civil War AN - 762682223; 2010-092698 AB - During the Civil War, the citizens of Missouri experienced one of the most intense guerrilla conflicts in American history. Actions near the Kansas and Arkansas borders were particularly notable. Recent publications on guerilla activities in the state make it possible to integrate and analyze the record within a geographic and geologic context. Kansas jayhawkers and redlegs were led by Jim Lane and Charles "Doc" Jennison; Lane looted and burned Osceola in 1861. Confederate irregulars included William Quantrill and William "Bloody Bill" Anderson. Quantrill led the infamous raid on Lawrence, Kansas in 1863. Anderson perpetrated the Centralia massacre in 1864. Both factions began hostilities during the Border War (1855-1861). Southern guerrillas, such as Alf Bolin, William O. Coleman, and Sam Hildebrand operated in the hill country of southern Missouri from bases in northern Arkansas. Despite the notorious atrocities committed on both sides, leaders claimed the legitimacy of military commissions. Both prairie and hill-country guerrilla attacks included hit-and-run tactics. Large group actions were used mostly in western Missouri, where successes could be attributed to surprise, excellent marksmanship, and fast horses on the relatively flat, tall-grass prairies. Attackers would disperse into smaller groups to evade pursuit to meet at pre-designated rallying points. Prairies generally coincide with Pennsylvanian strata and a decreasing precipitation gradient from east to west. Major barriers to movement included large rivers, such as the Osage, Marais des Cynes, and Marmaton, and to a lesser extent steep cutbanks in alluvium, wetlands, and forests. Ambushes were common at chokepoints such as fords and at the margins of woodlands. Large forces were impractical in the heavily patrolled, Union-held wooded highlands and swamps of southern and southeastern Missouri. Ambushes, assassinations, home invasions, captures, and executions were the most common tactics. Guerrillas wore Union uniforms as camouflage and for intelligence gathering. Dense thickets and steep hollows provided cover for evasive maneuvers. Circling back for secondary ambushes was common. Cave and hollows in the karstified lower Paleozoic strata and secluded Precambrian knobs were preferred campsites. JF - Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America AU - Evans, Kevin R AU - Davis, George H AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2010/04// PY - 2010 DA - April 2010 SP - 87 PB - Geological Society of America (GSA), Boulder, CO VL - 42 IS - 2 SN - 0016-7592, 0016-7592 KW - United States KW - bedrock KW - hills KW - Civil War KW - Missouri KW - prairies KW - caves KW - landforms KW - vegetation KW - rivers KW - military geology KW - fluvial features KW - landscapes KW - solution features KW - southern Missouri KW - 23:Geomorphology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/762682223?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.atitle=Geologic+influences+on+guerrilla+tactics+in+the+prairies+and+hills+of+southern+Missouri+during+the+Civil+War&rft.au=Evans%2C+Kevin+R%3BDavis%2C+George+H%3BAnonymous&rft.aulast=Evans&rft.aufirst=Kevin&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=87&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.issn=00167592&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Geological Society of America, North-Central Section, 44th annual meeting; Geological Society of America, South-Central Section, 44th annual meeting N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by the Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO, United States N1 - Date revised - 2010-01-01 N1 - PubXState - CO N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - GAAPBC N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Civil War; bedrock; caves; fluvial features; hills; landforms; landscapes; military geology; Missouri; prairies; rivers; solution features; southern Missouri; United States; vegetation ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Erionite, a naturally occurring fibrous mineral hazard in the tri-state area of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana AN - 756291436; 2010-082824 AB - Erionite, a naturally occurring fibrous zeolite mineral, was previously identified in the Killdeer Mountains of North Dakota and in several areas of the western U.S. associated with low temperature diagenesis of tertiary volcanics by alkaline groundwater. Recent sampling and analysis has expanded the detection of erionite south across the Tri-State region of North Dakota, Montana, and South Dakota associated with butte capping outcrops and eroded sediments derived from the Late Oligocene-Miocene Arikaree Formation as mapped in Montana and the Arikaree, Brule, and Chadron Formations as mapped in South Dakota. Disturbance of the erionite-bearing outcrop and sediments has occurred in some locales through fire suppression actions, aggregate mining, road construction, timber harvesting, recreational uses, agricultural and ranching activities. Malignant mesothelioma disease clusters associated with erionite exposure have been recognized in Turkey since the late 1970s and recently in Mexico. Disease clusters have not been identified in the U.S. and the mineral remains largely unregulated here; however, animal studies indicate that some forms of erionite have the potential to be more carcinogenic than asbestiform minerals. Data collection and analysis efforts are underway at the state and federal level to identify the extent of naturally occurring erionite-bearing geologic materials and evaluate the exposure and potential human health hazard resulting from past management activities. Data from these studies should be incorporated into land use management decision-making and overall environmental management. JF - Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America AU - Goodman, Brian S AU - Pierson, M Patrick AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2010/04// PY - 2010 DA - April 2010 SP - 5 PB - Geological Society of America (GSA), Boulder, CO VL - 42 IS - 3 SN - 0016-7592, 0016-7592 KW - United States KW - silicates KW - erionite KW - geologic hazards KW - diseases KW - Montana KW - North Dakota KW - zeolite group KW - risk assessment KW - framework silicates KW - South Dakota KW - public health KW - 01B:Mineralogy of silicates KW - 22:Environmental geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756291436?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.atitle=Erionite%2C+a+naturally+occurring+fibrous+mineral+hazard+in+the+tri-state+area+of+North+Dakota%2C+South+Dakota%2C+and+Montana&rft.au=Goodman%2C+Brian+S%3BPierson%2C+M+Patrick%3BAnonymous&rft.aulast=Goodman&rft.aufirst=Brian&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=5&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Abstracts+with+Programs+-+Geological+Society+of+America&rft.issn=00167592&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Geological Society of America, Rocky Mountain Section, 62nd annual meeting N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by the Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO, United States N1 - Date revised - 2010-01-01 N1 - PubXState - CO N1 - SuppNotes - Abstract 4-5 N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - GAAPBC N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - diseases; erionite; framework silicates; geologic hazards; Montana; North Dakota; public health; risk assessment; silicates; South Dakota; United States; zeolite group ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Effect of permafrost on seismic site response and design spectrum AN - 753850709; 2010-069801 JF - Seismological Research Letters AU - Dutta, U AU - Yang, Z AU - Xu, G AU - Moran, Seth AU - Beeler, Nick AU - Wong, Ivan AU - Weldon, Ray AU - McConnell, Vicki AU - Trehu, Anne Y1 - 2010/04// PY - 2010 DA - April 2010 SP - 286 PB - Seismological Society of America, El Cerrito, CA VL - 81 IS - 2 SN - 0895-0695, 0895-0695 KW - United States KW - soil mechanics KW - permafrost KW - geologic hazards KW - effects KW - seismic response KW - building codes KW - seismic risk KW - ground motion KW - risk assessment KW - Alaska KW - aseismic design KW - earthquakes KW - 22:Environmental geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/753850709?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Seismological+Research+Letters&rft.atitle=Effect+of+permafrost+on+seismic+site+response+and+design+spectrum&rft.au=Dutta%2C+U%3BYang%2C+Z%3BXu%2C+G%3BMoran%2C+Seth%3BBeeler%2C+Nick%3BWong%2C+Ivan%3BWeldon%2C+Ray%3BMcConnell%2C+Vicki%3BTrehu%2C+Anne&rft.aulast=Dutta&rft.aufirst=U&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=81&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=286&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Seismological+Research+Letters&rft.issn=08950695&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://srl.geoscienceworld.org/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Seismological Society of America 2010 annual meeting N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2010-01-01 N1 - PubXState - CA N1 - Last updated - 2016-11-17 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Alaska; aseismic design; building codes; earthquakes; effects; geologic hazards; ground motion; permafrost; risk assessment; seismic response; seismic risk; soil mechanics; United States ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Ground-motion attenuation model for small-to-moderate shallow crustal earthquakes in California and its implications on regionalization of ground-motion prediction models AN - 753850601; 2010-069827 JF - Seismological Research Letters AU - Chiou, Brian AU - Youngs, R AU - Abrahamson, N A AU - Addo, K AU - Moran, Seth AU - Beeler, Nick AU - Wong, Ivan AU - Weldon, Ray AU - McConnell, Vicki AU - Trehu, Anne Y1 - 2010/04// PY - 2010 DA - April 2010 SP - 291 PB - Seismological Society of America, El Cerrito, CA VL - 81 IS - 2 SN - 0895-0695, 0895-0695 KW - United States KW - geologic hazards KW - shallow-focus earthquakes KW - magnitude KW - models KW - California KW - attenuation KW - earthquake prediction KW - seismic risk KW - ground motion KW - risk assessment KW - earthquakes KW - crust KW - 19:Seismology KW - 22:Environmental geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/753850601?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Seismological+Research+Letters&rft.atitle=Ground-motion+attenuation+model+for+small-to-moderate+shallow+crustal+earthquakes+in+California+and+its+implications+on+regionalization+of+ground-motion+prediction+models&rft.au=Chiou%2C+Brian%3BYoungs%2C+R%3BAbrahamson%2C+N+A%3BAddo%2C+K%3BMoran%2C+Seth%3BBeeler%2C+Nick%3BWong%2C+Ivan%3BWeldon%2C+Ray%3BMcConnell%2C+Vicki%3BTrehu%2C+Anne&rft.aulast=Chiou&rft.aufirst=Brian&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=81&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=291&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Seismological+Research+Letters&rft.issn=08950695&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://srl.geoscienceworld.org/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Seismological Society of America 2010 annual meeting N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2010-01-01 N1 - PubXState - CA N1 - Last updated - 2016-09-16 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - attenuation; California; crust; earthquake prediction; earthquakes; geologic hazards; ground motion; magnitude; models; risk assessment; seismic risk; shallow-focus earthquakes; United States ER - TY - JOUR T1 - The impact of non-normality, sample size and estimation technique on goodness-of-fit measures in structural equation modeling: evidence from ten empirical models of travel behavior AN - 753824543; 3993396 AB - Ten empirical models of travel behavior are used to measure the variability of structural equation model goodness-of-fit as a function of sample size, multivariate kurtosis, and estimation technique. The estimation techniques are maximum likelihood, asymptotic distribution free, bootstrapping, and the M plus approach. The results highlight the divergence of these techniques when sample sizes are small and/or multivariate kurtosis high. Recommendations include using multiple estimation techniques and, when sample sizes are large, sampling the data and reestimating the models to test both the robustness of the specifications and to quantify, to some extent, the large sample bias inherent in the *y2 test statistic. Reprinted by permission of Springer JF - Quality and quantity AU - Ory, T AU - Mokhtarian, L AD - Federal Transit Administration, Washington ; University of California, Davis Y1 - 2010/04// PY - 2010 DA - Apr 2010 SP - 427 EP - 445 VL - 44 IS - 3 SN - 0033-5177, 0033-5177 KW - Sociology KW - Travel KW - Measurement KW - Research methods KW - Transport KW - Estimation KW - Sampling KW - Samples KW - Methodology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/753824543?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aibss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Quality+and+quantity&rft.atitle=The+impact+of+non-normality%2C+sample+size+and+estimation+technique+on+goodness-of-fit+measures+in+structural+equation+modeling%3A+evidence+from+ten+empirical+models+of+travel+behavior&rft.au=Ory%2C+T%3BMokhtarian%2C+L&rft.aulast=Ory&rft.aufirst=T&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=427&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Quality+and+quantity&rft.issn=00335177&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs11135-008-9215-6 LA - English DB - International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS) N1 - Date revised - 2013-06-12 N1 - Last updated - 2013-09-16 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - 11254 12225 12233; 12937; 11255 12228 10919; 4403 7854; 7854; 12952 7336 3198; 10919; 7994 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135-008-9215-6 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - Development of an Improved Fire Test Method and Criteria for Aircraft Electrical Wiring AN - 746163716; 13109875 AB - The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), as part of its hidden in-flight fire mitigation program, developed an improved flammability test method for aircraft electrical wiring insulation materials (including jackets and other wire protective materials). A comprehensive fire test research and development (R&D) project was conducted on aircraft electrical wiring insulation materials in an effort to continue mitigating the threat of in-flight fires. Previous work at the FAA and the National Fire Protection Association have indicated that the current FAA-required 60-degree Bunsen burner test for electric wire was inadequate to qualify wire when bundled and subjected to a severe ignition source. A literature search and in-house fire tests were conducted during this effort. The results of the literature search indicated that there was no small-scale flammability test standard available that considered radiant heat and wire bundling in its specifications or acceptance criteria that included burn length and after-flame extinguishing time; therefore, an improved flammability test standard for aircraft wiring was required. In-house fire tests were conducted to develop an improved flammability test and provide support data; tests included the current FAA-required 60-degree Bunsen burner test, the microscale combustion calorimetry test (ASTM D 7309-07), the thermogravimetric analysis (ASTM E 2550-07), the intermediate-scale fire test, and the radiant heat panel test. From this R&D effort, an alternative radiant heat panel test method was developed. This method was effective in evaluating the in-flight fire resistance qualities of aircraft electrical wiring insulation. JF - DEVELOPMENT OF AN IMPROVED FIRE TEST METHOD AND CRITERIA FOR AIRCRAFT ELECTRICAL WIRING. [np]. Apr 2010. AU - Reinhardt, J W Y1 - 2010/04// PY - 2010 DA - Apr 2010 PB - Federal Aviation Administration, [URL:http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov] KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Burns KW - Fires KW - Combustion KW - mitigation KW - Aircraft KW - Flammability KW - Calorimetry KW - Research programs KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/746163716?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Health+%26+Safety+Science+Abstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=Reinhardt%2C+J+W&rft.aulast=Reinhardt&rft.aufirst=J&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=Development+of+an+Improved+Fire+Test+Method+and+Criteria+for+Aircraft+Electrical+Wiring&rft.title=Development+of+an+Improved+Fire+Test+Method+and+Criteria+for+Aircraft+Electrical+Wiring&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-01 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-14 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Unclogging Transportation AN - 1735645172; 2011-862447 AB - JUST AFTER 6 P.M. on August 1, 2007 - at the heart of the evening rush hour - a portion of the busy I-35 bridge in Minneapolis collapsed into the Mississippi River, killing 13 people and injuring 145. The tragedy was quickly held up in the press as a symbol of America's declining transportation infrastructure, and members of Congress, state and local politicians, and various activists and experts were soon demanding a new wave of investment in our roads and bridges. Adapted from source document. JF - National Affairs AU - Duvall, Tyler AD - U.S. Department of Transportation Y1 - 2010/04// PY - 2010 DA - April 2010 SP - 87 EP - 102 PB - National Affairs, Inc. IS - 3 SN - 2150-6469, 2150-6469 KW - Transportation and transportation policy - Transportation KW - Transportation and transportation policy - Roads and land transport KW - Government - Local and municipal government KW - Media - Press KW - Politics - Politics and policy-making KW - Banking and public and private finance - Investments and securities KW - Economic conditions and policy - Economic policy, planning, and development KW - Government - State or regional government KW - Infrastructure KW - Press KW - Investments KW - Bridges KW - Transportation KW - State government KW - Local government KW - Politicians KW - Mississippi river KW - article UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1735645172?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apais&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=National+Affairs&rft.atitle=Unclogging+Transportation&rft.au=Duvall%2C+Tyler&rft.aulast=Duvall&rft.aufirst=Tyler&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=87&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=National+Affairs&rft.issn=21506469&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.nationalaffairs.com/archive/issue/default.asp LA - English DB - PAIS Index N1 - Date revised - 2015-12-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-09-28 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Transportation; Bridges; Local government; Mississippi river; Press; Politicians; Investments; Infrastructure; State government ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. [Part 7 of 8] T2 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 873131885; 14208-3_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 35.1-mile segment of US 95 between Garwood (Mile Post 438.24) and Sagle (Mile Post 469.75) in Kootenai and Bonner counties, Idaho is proposed. The segment has experienced a 50 percent increase in traffic volume since 1990 and it is anticipated that local and through traffic will continue to increase at the same rate through the design year of 2030. Many public and private access points along the highway limit the facility's capacity and contribute to increased vehicle crashes. Accident statistics for the highway demonstrate that this section of US 95 has a crash severity rate and a fatality rate greater than the statewide average for similar highways. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The action alternatives cover six segments that make up the corridor. The Yellow Alternative would reconstruct the freeway along the existing alignment, with three options in Sagle with respect to interchange location and frontage road locations. The Blue Alternative would provide a freeway along the existing alignment with short segments along new alignment. The Modified Brown Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide a facility similar to the Blue or Yellow alternative in each area, but offering refinements. Regardless of the action alternative selected, the facility would provide two travel lanes in each direction separated by a 50-foot median along the route, excepting in wetland areas, where a narrower median would be used to prevent excessive wetland losses. In the Cocolalla, Westmond, and Sagle areas, the Brown and Yellow alternatives would provide a 22-foot median with a concrete barrier. A bicycle/pedestrian path would be provided along the highway. All action alternatives would also include frontage roads. Access would be confined to interchanges. Rights-of-way acquisition cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $44 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An improved US 95 would accommodate present and future traffic demand improve the safety of the highway for all users. Confining access to interchanges would ensure safe, efficient movement of vehicles along the facility. At-grade railroad crossings would be replaced by bridges, eliminating railroad/automobile conflicts. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 69 residences, 41 businesses, two sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, 721 acres of farmland, 75 acres of riparian habitat, and 632 acres of forested land, 58.7 acres of floodplain, and 91.7 acres of wetlands. All action alternatives would affect Cocolalla Creek. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 48 residences and two businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0125D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100113, 619 pages and maps, Technical Reports; CD-ROM, March 31, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-06-F KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Idaho KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131885?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-31&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 31, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. [Part 6 of 8] T2 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 873131882; 14208-3_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 35.1-mile segment of US 95 between Garwood (Mile Post 438.24) and Sagle (Mile Post 469.75) in Kootenai and Bonner counties, Idaho is proposed. The segment has experienced a 50 percent increase in traffic volume since 1990 and it is anticipated that local and through traffic will continue to increase at the same rate through the design year of 2030. Many public and private access points along the highway limit the facility's capacity and contribute to increased vehicle crashes. Accident statistics for the highway demonstrate that this section of US 95 has a crash severity rate and a fatality rate greater than the statewide average for similar highways. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The action alternatives cover six segments that make up the corridor. The Yellow Alternative would reconstruct the freeway along the existing alignment, with three options in Sagle with respect to interchange location and frontage road locations. The Blue Alternative would provide a freeway along the existing alignment with short segments along new alignment. The Modified Brown Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide a facility similar to the Blue or Yellow alternative in each area, but offering refinements. Regardless of the action alternative selected, the facility would provide two travel lanes in each direction separated by a 50-foot median along the route, excepting in wetland areas, where a narrower median would be used to prevent excessive wetland losses. In the Cocolalla, Westmond, and Sagle areas, the Brown and Yellow alternatives would provide a 22-foot median with a concrete barrier. A bicycle/pedestrian path would be provided along the highway. All action alternatives would also include frontage roads. Access would be confined to interchanges. Rights-of-way acquisition cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $44 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An improved US 95 would accommodate present and future traffic demand improve the safety of the highway for all users. Confining access to interchanges would ensure safe, efficient movement of vehicles along the facility. At-grade railroad crossings would be replaced by bridges, eliminating railroad/automobile conflicts. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 69 residences, 41 businesses, two sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, 721 acres of farmland, 75 acres of riparian habitat, and 632 acres of forested land, 58.7 acres of floodplain, and 91.7 acres of wetlands. All action alternatives would affect Cocolalla Creek. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 48 residences and two businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0125D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100113, 619 pages and maps, Technical Reports; CD-ROM, March 31, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-06-F KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Idaho KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131882?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-31&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 31, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. [Part 5 of 8] T2 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 873131878; 14208-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 35.1-mile segment of US 95 between Garwood (Mile Post 438.24) and Sagle (Mile Post 469.75) in Kootenai and Bonner counties, Idaho is proposed. The segment has experienced a 50 percent increase in traffic volume since 1990 and it is anticipated that local and through traffic will continue to increase at the same rate through the design year of 2030. Many public and private access points along the highway limit the facility's capacity and contribute to increased vehicle crashes. Accident statistics for the highway demonstrate that this section of US 95 has a crash severity rate and a fatality rate greater than the statewide average for similar highways. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The action alternatives cover six segments that make up the corridor. The Yellow Alternative would reconstruct the freeway along the existing alignment, with three options in Sagle with respect to interchange location and frontage road locations. The Blue Alternative would provide a freeway along the existing alignment with short segments along new alignment. The Modified Brown Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide a facility similar to the Blue or Yellow alternative in each area, but offering refinements. Regardless of the action alternative selected, the facility would provide two travel lanes in each direction separated by a 50-foot median along the route, excepting in wetland areas, where a narrower median would be used to prevent excessive wetland losses. In the Cocolalla, Westmond, and Sagle areas, the Brown and Yellow alternatives would provide a 22-foot median with a concrete barrier. A bicycle/pedestrian path would be provided along the highway. All action alternatives would also include frontage roads. Access would be confined to interchanges. Rights-of-way acquisition cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $44 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An improved US 95 would accommodate present and future traffic demand improve the safety of the highway for all users. Confining access to interchanges would ensure safe, efficient movement of vehicles along the facility. At-grade railroad crossings would be replaced by bridges, eliminating railroad/automobile conflicts. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 69 residences, 41 businesses, two sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, 721 acres of farmland, 75 acres of riparian habitat, and 632 acres of forested land, 58.7 acres of floodplain, and 91.7 acres of wetlands. All action alternatives would affect Cocolalla Creek. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 48 residences and two businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0125D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100113, 619 pages and maps, Technical Reports; CD-ROM, March 31, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-06-F KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Idaho KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131878?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-31&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 31, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. [Part 4 of 8] T2 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 873131873; 14208-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 35.1-mile segment of US 95 between Garwood (Mile Post 438.24) and Sagle (Mile Post 469.75) in Kootenai and Bonner counties, Idaho is proposed. The segment has experienced a 50 percent increase in traffic volume since 1990 and it is anticipated that local and through traffic will continue to increase at the same rate through the design year of 2030. Many public and private access points along the highway limit the facility's capacity and contribute to increased vehicle crashes. Accident statistics for the highway demonstrate that this section of US 95 has a crash severity rate and a fatality rate greater than the statewide average for similar highways. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The action alternatives cover six segments that make up the corridor. The Yellow Alternative would reconstruct the freeway along the existing alignment, with three options in Sagle with respect to interchange location and frontage road locations. The Blue Alternative would provide a freeway along the existing alignment with short segments along new alignment. The Modified Brown Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide a facility similar to the Blue or Yellow alternative in each area, but offering refinements. Regardless of the action alternative selected, the facility would provide two travel lanes in each direction separated by a 50-foot median along the route, excepting in wetland areas, where a narrower median would be used to prevent excessive wetland losses. In the Cocolalla, Westmond, and Sagle areas, the Brown and Yellow alternatives would provide a 22-foot median with a concrete barrier. A bicycle/pedestrian path would be provided along the highway. All action alternatives would also include frontage roads. Access would be confined to interchanges. Rights-of-way acquisition cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $44 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An improved US 95 would accommodate present and future traffic demand improve the safety of the highway for all users. Confining access to interchanges would ensure safe, efficient movement of vehicles along the facility. At-grade railroad crossings would be replaced by bridges, eliminating railroad/automobile conflicts. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 69 residences, 41 businesses, two sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, 721 acres of farmland, 75 acres of riparian habitat, and 632 acres of forested land, 58.7 acres of floodplain, and 91.7 acres of wetlands. All action alternatives would affect Cocolalla Creek. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 48 residences and two businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0125D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100113, 619 pages and maps, Technical Reports; CD-ROM, March 31, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-06-F KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Idaho KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131873?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-31&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 31, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. [Part 3 of 8] T2 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 873131866; 14208-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 35.1-mile segment of US 95 between Garwood (Mile Post 438.24) and Sagle (Mile Post 469.75) in Kootenai and Bonner counties, Idaho is proposed. The segment has experienced a 50 percent increase in traffic volume since 1990 and it is anticipated that local and through traffic will continue to increase at the same rate through the design year of 2030. Many public and private access points along the highway limit the facility's capacity and contribute to increased vehicle crashes. Accident statistics for the highway demonstrate that this section of US 95 has a crash severity rate and a fatality rate greater than the statewide average for similar highways. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The action alternatives cover six segments that make up the corridor. The Yellow Alternative would reconstruct the freeway along the existing alignment, with three options in Sagle with respect to interchange location and frontage road locations. The Blue Alternative would provide a freeway along the existing alignment with short segments along new alignment. The Modified Brown Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide a facility similar to the Blue or Yellow alternative in each area, but offering refinements. Regardless of the action alternative selected, the facility would provide two travel lanes in each direction separated by a 50-foot median along the route, excepting in wetland areas, where a narrower median would be used to prevent excessive wetland losses. In the Cocolalla, Westmond, and Sagle areas, the Brown and Yellow alternatives would provide a 22-foot median with a concrete barrier. A bicycle/pedestrian path would be provided along the highway. All action alternatives would also include frontage roads. Access would be confined to interchanges. Rights-of-way acquisition cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $44 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An improved US 95 would accommodate present and future traffic demand improve the safety of the highway for all users. Confining access to interchanges would ensure safe, efficient movement of vehicles along the facility. At-grade railroad crossings would be replaced by bridges, eliminating railroad/automobile conflicts. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 69 residences, 41 businesses, two sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, 721 acres of farmland, 75 acres of riparian habitat, and 632 acres of forested land, 58.7 acres of floodplain, and 91.7 acres of wetlands. All action alternatives would affect Cocolalla Creek. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 48 residences and two businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0125D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100113, 619 pages and maps, Technical Reports; CD-ROM, March 31, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-06-F KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Idaho KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131866?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-31&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 31, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. [Part 2 of 8] T2 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 873131861; 14208-3_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 35.1-mile segment of US 95 between Garwood (Mile Post 438.24) and Sagle (Mile Post 469.75) in Kootenai and Bonner counties, Idaho is proposed. The segment has experienced a 50 percent increase in traffic volume since 1990 and it is anticipated that local and through traffic will continue to increase at the same rate through the design year of 2030. Many public and private access points along the highway limit the facility's capacity and contribute to increased vehicle crashes. Accident statistics for the highway demonstrate that this section of US 95 has a crash severity rate and a fatality rate greater than the statewide average for similar highways. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The action alternatives cover six segments that make up the corridor. The Yellow Alternative would reconstruct the freeway along the existing alignment, with three options in Sagle with respect to interchange location and frontage road locations. The Blue Alternative would provide a freeway along the existing alignment with short segments along new alignment. The Modified Brown Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide a facility similar to the Blue or Yellow alternative in each area, but offering refinements. Regardless of the action alternative selected, the facility would provide two travel lanes in each direction separated by a 50-foot median along the route, excepting in wetland areas, where a narrower median would be used to prevent excessive wetland losses. In the Cocolalla, Westmond, and Sagle areas, the Brown and Yellow alternatives would provide a 22-foot median with a concrete barrier. A bicycle/pedestrian path would be provided along the highway. All action alternatives would also include frontage roads. Access would be confined to interchanges. Rights-of-way acquisition cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $44 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An improved US 95 would accommodate present and future traffic demand improve the safety of the highway for all users. Confining access to interchanges would ensure safe, efficient movement of vehicles along the facility. At-grade railroad crossings would be replaced by bridges, eliminating railroad/automobile conflicts. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 69 residences, 41 businesses, two sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, 721 acres of farmland, 75 acres of riparian habitat, and 632 acres of forested land, 58.7 acres of floodplain, and 91.7 acres of wetlands. All action alternatives would affect Cocolalla Creek. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 48 residences and two businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0125D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100113, 619 pages and maps, Technical Reports; CD-ROM, March 31, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-06-F KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Idaho KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131861?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-31&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 31, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. [Part 1 of 8] T2 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 873131844; 14208-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 35.1-mile segment of US 95 between Garwood (Mile Post 438.24) and Sagle (Mile Post 469.75) in Kootenai and Bonner counties, Idaho is proposed. The segment has experienced a 50 percent increase in traffic volume since 1990 and it is anticipated that local and through traffic will continue to increase at the same rate through the design year of 2030. Many public and private access points along the highway limit the facility's capacity and contribute to increased vehicle crashes. Accident statistics for the highway demonstrate that this section of US 95 has a crash severity rate and a fatality rate greater than the statewide average for similar highways. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The action alternatives cover six segments that make up the corridor. The Yellow Alternative would reconstruct the freeway along the existing alignment, with three options in Sagle with respect to interchange location and frontage road locations. The Blue Alternative would provide a freeway along the existing alignment with short segments along new alignment. The Modified Brown Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide a facility similar to the Blue or Yellow alternative in each area, but offering refinements. Regardless of the action alternative selected, the facility would provide two travel lanes in each direction separated by a 50-foot median along the route, excepting in wetland areas, where a narrower median would be used to prevent excessive wetland losses. In the Cocolalla, Westmond, and Sagle areas, the Brown and Yellow alternatives would provide a 22-foot median with a concrete barrier. A bicycle/pedestrian path would be provided along the highway. All action alternatives would also include frontage roads. Access would be confined to interchanges. Rights-of-way acquisition cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $44 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An improved US 95 would accommodate present and future traffic demand improve the safety of the highway for all users. Confining access to interchanges would ensure safe, efficient movement of vehicles along the facility. At-grade railroad crossings would be replaced by bridges, eliminating railroad/automobile conflicts. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 69 residences, 41 businesses, two sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, 721 acres of farmland, 75 acres of riparian habitat, and 632 acres of forested land, 58.7 acres of floodplain, and 91.7 acres of wetlands. All action alternatives would affect Cocolalla Creek. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 48 residences and two businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0125D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100113, 619 pages and maps, Technical Reports; CD-ROM, March 31, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-06-F KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Idaho KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131844?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-31&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 31, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. [Part 8 of 8] T2 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 873130233; 14208-3_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 35.1-mile segment of US 95 between Garwood (Mile Post 438.24) and Sagle (Mile Post 469.75) in Kootenai and Bonner counties, Idaho is proposed. The segment has experienced a 50 percent increase in traffic volume since 1990 and it is anticipated that local and through traffic will continue to increase at the same rate through the design year of 2030. Many public and private access points along the highway limit the facility's capacity and contribute to increased vehicle crashes. Accident statistics for the highway demonstrate that this section of US 95 has a crash severity rate and a fatality rate greater than the statewide average for similar highways. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The action alternatives cover six segments that make up the corridor. The Yellow Alternative would reconstruct the freeway along the existing alignment, with three options in Sagle with respect to interchange location and frontage road locations. The Blue Alternative would provide a freeway along the existing alignment with short segments along new alignment. The Modified Brown Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide a facility similar to the Blue or Yellow alternative in each area, but offering refinements. Regardless of the action alternative selected, the facility would provide two travel lanes in each direction separated by a 50-foot median along the route, excepting in wetland areas, where a narrower median would be used to prevent excessive wetland losses. In the Cocolalla, Westmond, and Sagle areas, the Brown and Yellow alternatives would provide a 22-foot median with a concrete barrier. A bicycle/pedestrian path would be provided along the highway. All action alternatives would also include frontage roads. Access would be confined to interchanges. Rights-of-way acquisition cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $44 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An improved US 95 would accommodate present and future traffic demand improve the safety of the highway for all users. Confining access to interchanges would ensure safe, efficient movement of vehicles along the facility. At-grade railroad crossings would be replaced by bridges, eliminating railroad/automobile conflicts. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 69 residences, 41 businesses, two sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, 721 acres of farmland, 75 acres of riparian habitat, and 632 acres of forested land, 58.7 acres of floodplain, and 91.7 acres of wetlands. All action alternatives would affect Cocolalla Creek. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 48 residences and two businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0125D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100113, 619 pages and maps, Technical Reports; CD-ROM, March 31, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-06-F KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Idaho KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130233?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-31&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 31, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 95 GARWOOD TO SAGLE, KOOTENAI AND BONNER COUNTIES, IDAHO. AN - 15224413; 14208 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of a 35.1-mile segment of US 95 between Garwood (Mile Post 438.24) and Sagle (Mile Post 469.75) in Kootenai and Bonner counties, Idaho is proposed. The segment has experienced a 50 percent increase in traffic volume since 1990 and it is anticipated that local and through traffic will continue to increase at the same rate through the design year of 2030. Many public and private access points along the highway limit the facility's capacity and contribute to increased vehicle crashes. Accident statistics for the highway demonstrate that this section of US 95 has a crash severity rate and a fatality rate greater than the statewide average for similar highways. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The action alternatives cover six segments that make up the corridor. The Yellow Alternative would reconstruct the freeway along the existing alignment, with three options in Sagle with respect to interchange location and frontage road locations. The Blue Alternative would provide a freeway along the existing alignment with short segments along new alignment. The Modified Brown Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would provide a facility similar to the Blue or Yellow alternative in each area, but offering refinements. Regardless of the action alternative selected, the facility would provide two travel lanes in each direction separated by a 50-foot median along the route, excepting in wetland areas, where a narrower median would be used to prevent excessive wetland losses. In the Cocolalla, Westmond, and Sagle areas, the Brown and Yellow alternatives would provide a 22-foot median with a concrete barrier. A bicycle/pedestrian path would be provided along the highway. All action alternatives would also include frontage roads. Access would be confined to interchanges. Rights-of-way acquisition cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $44 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An improved US 95 would accommodate present and future traffic demand improve the safety of the highway for all users. Confining access to interchanges would ensure safe, efficient movement of vehicles along the facility. At-grade railroad crossings would be replaced by bridges, eliminating railroad/automobile conflicts. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 69 residences, 41 businesses, two sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, 721 acres of farmland, 75 acres of riparian habitat, and 632 acres of forested land, 58.7 acres of floodplain, and 91.7 acres of wetlands. All action alternatives would affect Cocolalla Creek. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 48 residences and two businesses. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0125D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100113, 619 pages and maps, Technical Reports; CD-ROM, March 31, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-ID-EIS-06-F KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Idaho KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/15224413?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-31&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.title=US+95+GARWOOD+TO+SAGLE%2C+KOOTENAI+AND+BONNER+COUNTIES%2C+IDAHO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boise, Idaho; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 31, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - D2 DOWNTOWN DALLAS TRANSIT STUDY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 4 of 4] T2 - D2 DOWNTOWN DALLAS TRANSIT STUDY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 756826649; 14196-100101_0004 AB - PURPOSE: A 2.5-mile light rail transit (LRT) project through downtown Dallas, Texas is proposed. The Dallas/Fort Worth regions population is expected to increase from 4.8 million (2000) to 8.5 million, or 75 percent by the year 2030. Regional employment is expected to increase from 3.0 million to 5.2 million. Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) intends to seek a federal transit grant to assist in the funding of the Downtown Dallas (D2) Corridor project which would extend from the Victory Station on the Northwest corridor serving the Victory Park area, into the heart of the central business district (CBD) crossing under the existing LRT Pacific-Bryan transit mall near the West End, and then proceeding south and east serving the Convention Center, Government Center and Farmers Market Districts before reconnecting with the existing Southeast corridor in Deep Ellum. The project would represent a major capacity improvement to the existing LRT system which is capacity constrained by only one alignment through the CBD. This second CBD alignment would open in 2016. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are assessed in this draft EIS. Two fixed-guideway build alternatives identified during screening include LRT Alternative B7 Lamar-Commerce on an alignment through the City Center business area, and LRT Alternative B4 Lamar-Young serving the Government Center and Harwood District/Farmers Market area. Both of these alternatives would be similar in length (two miles) and have surface and tunnel sections. Following the screening process, Alternative B4 Lamar-Young was refined and a range of options considered in order to provide service to the proposed Convention Center Hotel project being advanced by the City of Dallas at the southeast corner of Lamar and Young Streets. This effort resulted in two alternatives: B4a Lamar-Marilla, which would include a tunnel station closer to the hotel at the old Santa Fe Railroad site, a longer tunnel section, and an underground station at City Hall; and B4b Lamar-Convention Center, which would provide a tunnel station adjacent to the hotel site, an additional underground station at City Hall, and a longer tunnel section. Capital cost estimates, excluding finance charges, range from $377.6 million for the B4 Alternative to $612.6 million for the B4b Alternative in year 2008 dollars. The 2030 No Build LRT system is estimated to cost $197.2 million annually to operate. All 2030 build alternatives add a minimum of nearly $26 million in operating and maintenance costs annually. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would allow DART to: increase transit capacity in Downtown Dallas to support increased demand; enhance system operational flexibility and schedule reliability; improve access and circulation to, through, and within the CBD; promote transit supportive land uses and sustain the economic strength of the CBD; and accommodate travel demands associated with continued regional growth. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would reduce vehicle miles traveled only slightly compared to the No Build Alternative. Most arterial roadways would see only slight increases or no change in volumes and no change in level of service. There would be small amounts of localized added congestion or delay in the immediate vicinity of some LRT stations, and at some at-grade LRT crossings. Required property acquisitions would range from 14 to 39 parcels. Historic sites that could be impacted include the Olive & Meyers Manufacturing Building, the Chapel at First Presbyterian Church, and the Scottish Rite Temple. Up to 12 hazardous materials sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) JF - EPA number: 100101, Draft EIS--443 pages, Plan and Profile Drawings--60 oversize pages, March 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Texas KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826649?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=D2+DOWNTOWN+DALLAS+TRANSIT+STUDY%2C+CITY+OF+DALLAS%2C+DALLAS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=D2+DOWNTOWN+DALLAS+TRANSIT+STUDY%2C+CITY+OF+DALLAS%2C+DALLAS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - D2 DOWNTOWN DALLAS TRANSIT STUDY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 3 of 4] T2 - D2 DOWNTOWN DALLAS TRANSIT STUDY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 756826643; 14196-100101_0003 AB - PURPOSE: A 2.5-mile light rail transit (LRT) project through downtown Dallas, Texas is proposed. The Dallas/Fort Worth regions population is expected to increase from 4.8 million (2000) to 8.5 million, or 75 percent by the year 2030. Regional employment is expected to increase from 3.0 million to 5.2 million. Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) intends to seek a federal transit grant to assist in the funding of the Downtown Dallas (D2) Corridor project which would extend from the Victory Station on the Northwest corridor serving the Victory Park area, into the heart of the central business district (CBD) crossing under the existing LRT Pacific-Bryan transit mall near the West End, and then proceeding south and east serving the Convention Center, Government Center and Farmers Market Districts before reconnecting with the existing Southeast corridor in Deep Ellum. The project would represent a major capacity improvement to the existing LRT system which is capacity constrained by only one alignment through the CBD. This second CBD alignment would open in 2016. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are assessed in this draft EIS. Two fixed-guideway build alternatives identified during screening include LRT Alternative B7 Lamar-Commerce on an alignment through the City Center business area, and LRT Alternative B4 Lamar-Young serving the Government Center and Harwood District/Farmers Market area. Both of these alternatives would be similar in length (two miles) and have surface and tunnel sections. Following the screening process, Alternative B4 Lamar-Young was refined and a range of options considered in order to provide service to the proposed Convention Center Hotel project being advanced by the City of Dallas at the southeast corner of Lamar and Young Streets. This effort resulted in two alternatives: B4a Lamar-Marilla, which would include a tunnel station closer to the hotel at the old Santa Fe Railroad site, a longer tunnel section, and an underground station at City Hall; and B4b Lamar-Convention Center, which would provide a tunnel station adjacent to the hotel site, an additional underground station at City Hall, and a longer tunnel section. Capital cost estimates, excluding finance charges, range from $377.6 million for the B4 Alternative to $612.6 million for the B4b Alternative in year 2008 dollars. The 2030 No Build LRT system is estimated to cost $197.2 million annually to operate. All 2030 build alternatives add a minimum of nearly $26 million in operating and maintenance costs annually. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would allow DART to: increase transit capacity in Downtown Dallas to support increased demand; enhance system operational flexibility and schedule reliability; improve access and circulation to, through, and within the CBD; promote transit supportive land uses and sustain the economic strength of the CBD; and accommodate travel demands associated with continued regional growth. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would reduce vehicle miles traveled only slightly compared to the No Build Alternative. Most arterial roadways would see only slight increases or no change in volumes and no change in level of service. There would be small amounts of localized added congestion or delay in the immediate vicinity of some LRT stations, and at some at-grade LRT crossings. Required property acquisitions would range from 14 to 39 parcels. Historic sites that could be impacted include the Olive & Meyers Manufacturing Building, the Chapel at First Presbyterian Church, and the Scottish Rite Temple. Up to 12 hazardous materials sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) JF - EPA number: 100101, Draft EIS--443 pages, Plan and Profile Drawings--60 oversize pages, March 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Texas KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826643?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=D2+DOWNTOWN+DALLAS+TRANSIT+STUDY%2C+CITY+OF+DALLAS%2C+DALLAS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=D2+DOWNTOWN+DALLAS+TRANSIT+STUDY%2C+CITY+OF+DALLAS%2C+DALLAS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - D2 DOWNTOWN DALLAS TRANSIT STUDY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 2 of 4] T2 - D2 DOWNTOWN DALLAS TRANSIT STUDY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 756826630; 14196-100101_0002 AB - PURPOSE: A 2.5-mile light rail transit (LRT) project through downtown Dallas, Texas is proposed. The Dallas/Fort Worth regions population is expected to increase from 4.8 million (2000) to 8.5 million, or 75 percent by the year 2030. Regional employment is expected to increase from 3.0 million to 5.2 million. Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) intends to seek a federal transit grant to assist in the funding of the Downtown Dallas (D2) Corridor project which would extend from the Victory Station on the Northwest corridor serving the Victory Park area, into the heart of the central business district (CBD) crossing under the existing LRT Pacific-Bryan transit mall near the West End, and then proceeding south and east serving the Convention Center, Government Center and Farmers Market Districts before reconnecting with the existing Southeast corridor in Deep Ellum. The project would represent a major capacity improvement to the existing LRT system which is capacity constrained by only one alignment through the CBD. This second CBD alignment would open in 2016. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are assessed in this draft EIS. Two fixed-guideway build alternatives identified during screening include LRT Alternative B7 Lamar-Commerce on an alignment through the City Center business area, and LRT Alternative B4 Lamar-Young serving the Government Center and Harwood District/Farmers Market area. Both of these alternatives would be similar in length (two miles) and have surface and tunnel sections. Following the screening process, Alternative B4 Lamar-Young was refined and a range of options considered in order to provide service to the proposed Convention Center Hotel project being advanced by the City of Dallas at the southeast corner of Lamar and Young Streets. This effort resulted in two alternatives: B4a Lamar-Marilla, which would include a tunnel station closer to the hotel at the old Santa Fe Railroad site, a longer tunnel section, and an underground station at City Hall; and B4b Lamar-Convention Center, which would provide a tunnel station adjacent to the hotel site, an additional underground station at City Hall, and a longer tunnel section. Capital cost estimates, excluding finance charges, range from $377.6 million for the B4 Alternative to $612.6 million for the B4b Alternative in year 2008 dollars. The 2030 No Build LRT system is estimated to cost $197.2 million annually to operate. All 2030 build alternatives add a minimum of nearly $26 million in operating and maintenance costs annually. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would allow DART to: increase transit capacity in Downtown Dallas to support increased demand; enhance system operational flexibility and schedule reliability; improve access and circulation to, through, and within the CBD; promote transit supportive land uses and sustain the economic strength of the CBD; and accommodate travel demands associated with continued regional growth. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would reduce vehicle miles traveled only slightly compared to the No Build Alternative. Most arterial roadways would see only slight increases or no change in volumes and no change in level of service. There would be small amounts of localized added congestion or delay in the immediate vicinity of some LRT stations, and at some at-grade LRT crossings. Required property acquisitions would range from 14 to 39 parcels. Historic sites that could be impacted include the Olive & Meyers Manufacturing Building, the Chapel at First Presbyterian Church, and the Scottish Rite Temple. Up to 12 hazardous materials sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) JF - EPA number: 100101, Draft EIS--443 pages, Plan and Profile Drawings--60 oversize pages, March 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Texas KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826630?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=D2+DOWNTOWN+DALLAS+TRANSIT+STUDY%2C+CITY+OF+DALLAS%2C+DALLAS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=D2+DOWNTOWN+DALLAS+TRANSIT+STUDY%2C+CITY+OF+DALLAS%2C+DALLAS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - D2 DOWNTOWN DALLAS TRANSIT STUDY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 1 of 4] T2 - D2 DOWNTOWN DALLAS TRANSIT STUDY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 756826607; 14196-100101_0001 AB - PURPOSE: A 2.5-mile light rail transit (LRT) project through downtown Dallas, Texas is proposed. The Dallas/Fort Worth regions population is expected to increase from 4.8 million (2000) to 8.5 million, or 75 percent by the year 2030. Regional employment is expected to increase from 3.0 million to 5.2 million. Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) intends to seek a federal transit grant to assist in the funding of the Downtown Dallas (D2) Corridor project which would extend from the Victory Station on the Northwest corridor serving the Victory Park area, into the heart of the central business district (CBD) crossing under the existing LRT Pacific-Bryan transit mall near the West End, and then proceeding south and east serving the Convention Center, Government Center and Farmers Market Districts before reconnecting with the existing Southeast corridor in Deep Ellum. The project would represent a major capacity improvement to the existing LRT system which is capacity constrained by only one alignment through the CBD. This second CBD alignment would open in 2016. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are assessed in this draft EIS. Two fixed-guideway build alternatives identified during screening include LRT Alternative B7 Lamar-Commerce on an alignment through the City Center business area, and LRT Alternative B4 Lamar-Young serving the Government Center and Harwood District/Farmers Market area. Both of these alternatives would be similar in length (two miles) and have surface and tunnel sections. Following the screening process, Alternative B4 Lamar-Young was refined and a range of options considered in order to provide service to the proposed Convention Center Hotel project being advanced by the City of Dallas at the southeast corner of Lamar and Young Streets. This effort resulted in two alternatives: B4a Lamar-Marilla, which would include a tunnel station closer to the hotel at the old Santa Fe Railroad site, a longer tunnel section, and an underground station at City Hall; and B4b Lamar-Convention Center, which would provide a tunnel station adjacent to the hotel site, an additional underground station at City Hall, and a longer tunnel section. Capital cost estimates, excluding finance charges, range from $377.6 million for the B4 Alternative to $612.6 million for the B4b Alternative in year 2008 dollars. The 2030 No Build LRT system is estimated to cost $197.2 million annually to operate. All 2030 build alternatives add a minimum of nearly $26 million in operating and maintenance costs annually. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would allow DART to: increase transit capacity in Downtown Dallas to support increased demand; enhance system operational flexibility and schedule reliability; improve access and circulation to, through, and within the CBD; promote transit supportive land uses and sustain the economic strength of the CBD; and accommodate travel demands associated with continued regional growth. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would reduce vehicle miles traveled only slightly compared to the No Build Alternative. Most arterial roadways would see only slight increases or no change in volumes and no change in level of service. There would be small amounts of localized added congestion or delay in the immediate vicinity of some LRT stations, and at some at-grade LRT crossings. Required property acquisitions would range from 14 to 39 parcels. Historic sites that could be impacted include the Olive & Meyers Manufacturing Building, the Chapel at First Presbyterian Church, and the Scottish Rite Temple. Up to 12 hazardous materials sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) JF - EPA number: 100101, Draft EIS--443 pages, Plan and Profile Drawings--60 oversize pages, March 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Texas KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826607?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=D2+DOWNTOWN+DALLAS+TRANSIT+STUDY%2C+CITY+OF+DALLAS%2C+DALLAS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=D2+DOWNTOWN+DALLAS+TRANSIT+STUDY%2C+CITY+OF+DALLAS%2C+DALLAS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - D2 DOWNTOWN DALLAS TRANSIT STUDY, CITY OF DALLAS, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 16383648; 14196 AB - PURPOSE: A 2.5-mile light rail transit (LRT) project through downtown Dallas, Texas is proposed. The Dallas/Fort Worth regions population is expected to increase from 4.8 million (2000) to 8.5 million, or 75 percent by the year 2030. Regional employment is expected to increase from 3.0 million to 5.2 million. Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) intends to seek a federal transit grant to assist in the funding of the Downtown Dallas (D2) Corridor project which would extend from the Victory Station on the Northwest corridor serving the Victory Park area, into the heart of the central business district (CBD) crossing under the existing LRT Pacific-Bryan transit mall near the West End, and then proceeding south and east serving the Convention Center, Government Center and Farmers Market Districts before reconnecting with the existing Southeast corridor in Deep Ellum. The project would represent a major capacity improvement to the existing LRT system which is capacity constrained by only one alignment through the CBD. This second CBD alignment would open in 2016. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are assessed in this draft EIS. Two fixed-guideway build alternatives identified during screening include LRT Alternative B7 Lamar-Commerce on an alignment through the City Center business area, and LRT Alternative B4 Lamar-Young serving the Government Center and Harwood District/Farmers Market area. Both of these alternatives would be similar in length (two miles) and have surface and tunnel sections. Following the screening process, Alternative B4 Lamar-Young was refined and a range of options considered in order to provide service to the proposed Convention Center Hotel project being advanced by the City of Dallas at the southeast corner of Lamar and Young Streets. This effort resulted in two alternatives: B4a Lamar-Marilla, which would include a tunnel station closer to the hotel at the old Santa Fe Railroad site, a longer tunnel section, and an underground station at City Hall; and B4b Lamar-Convention Center, which would provide a tunnel station adjacent to the hotel site, an additional underground station at City Hall, and a longer tunnel section. Capital cost estimates, excluding finance charges, range from $377.6 million for the B4 Alternative to $612.6 million for the B4b Alternative in year 2008 dollars. The 2030 No Build LRT system is estimated to cost $197.2 million annually to operate. All 2030 build alternatives add a minimum of nearly $26 million in operating and maintenance costs annually. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed action would allow DART to: increase transit capacity in Downtown Dallas to support increased demand; enhance system operational flexibility and schedule reliability; improve access and circulation to, through, and within the CBD; promote transit supportive land uses and sustain the economic strength of the CBD; and accommodate travel demands associated with continued regional growth. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The build alternatives would reduce vehicle miles traveled only slightly compared to the No Build Alternative. Most arterial roadways would see only slight increases or no change in volumes and no change in level of service. There would be small amounts of localized added congestion or delay in the immediate vicinity of some LRT stations, and at some at-grade LRT crossings. Required property acquisitions would range from 14 to 39 parcels. Historic sites that could be impacted include the Olive & Meyers Manufacturing Building, the Chapel at First Presbyterian Church, and the Scottish Rite Temple. Up to 12 hazardous materials sites could be encountered during construction. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) JF - EPA number: 100101, Draft EIS--443 pages, Plan and Profile Drawings--60 oversize pages, March 25, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Texas KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16383648?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=D2+DOWNTOWN+DALLAS+TRANSIT+STUDY%2C+CITY+OF+DALLAS%2C+DALLAS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=D2+DOWNTOWN+DALLAS+TRANSIT+STUDY%2C+CITY+OF+DALLAS%2C+DALLAS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 502 CORRIDOR WIDENING, CLARK COUNTY, WASHINGTON (SR 502 / INTERSTATE 5 TO BATTLE GROUND - ADD LANES). [Part 2 of 3] T2 - SR 502 CORRIDOR WIDENING, CLARK COUNTY, WASHINGTON (SR 502 / INTERSTATE 5 TO BATTLE GROUND - ADD LANES). AN - 756827096; 14194-100098_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Safety and capacity improvements to State Route (SR) 502 between Interstate 5 (I-5) and Battle Ground, north Clark County, Washington are proposed. SR 502 is one of two primary routes providing access to the City of Battle Ground and to the regional highway system (I-5) and the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area. The segment proposed for improvement extends five miles between NE 15th Avenue and NE 102nd Avenue. The project corridor is a heavily traveled, two-lane roadway with narrow shoulders and segments which have been designated as high accident corridors. Between 1990 and 2007, Clark County's population grew 74 percent and traffic volumes are projected to nearly triple by the year 2033 compared to 2005 traffic volumes. The range of initial alternatives developed for improving safety and mobility on SR 502 included five on-corridor alternatives, two off-corridor alternatives, and two transportation system management options. The best elements of the on-corridor alternatives and the transportation management alternatives were combined in a hybrid approach. The Build Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and a No Build Alternative are evaluated in this final EIS. The Build Alternative would widen the roadway to provide two lanes in each direction with a median treatment to separate westbound and eastbound traffic. New signals and turn pockets would be added at the intersections at NE 29th Avenue, NE 50th Avenue, NE 92nd Avenue, and the existing signal at NE 72nd Avenue would be improved. Other intersections would be restricted to right-turns only, with u-turns allowed at the four signalized intersections. Paved shoulders would be constructed along both sides of SR 502 for the entire corridor, while sidewalks would be provided in the rural commercially zoned area near Dollars Corner. Construction under the Build Alternative is expected to begin in 2012 and last three years. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternative would improve mobility and safety along the SR 502 corridor and improve regional connectivity between Battle Ground and I-5. Travel speeds under the Build Alternative would average in excess of 28 miles per hour through 2033. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Build Alternative would create 28 acres of new impervious surfaces and would convert 54 to 60 acres of grassland, scrub, forest and riparian land to roadway or related facilities. Two to three acres of potential fish habitat for endangered species would be disturbed and nine to 14 acres of wetlands would be filled. Corridor improvements would result in the conversion of approximately 12 to 16 acres of prime farmland to roadway and storm water facilities, displacement of 22 to 28 businesses and 25 to 35 residences, adverse effects on two historically significant properties, and disturbance of four sites know to contain hazardous materials (primarily petroleum, solvents and metals). LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0303D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100098, Final EIS--346 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, March 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-09-01-F KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Property Disposition KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827096?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+502+CORRIDOR+WIDENING%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SR+502+%2F+INTERSTATE+5+TO+BATTLE+GROUND+-+ADD+LANES%29.&rft.title=SR+502+CORRIDOR+WIDENING%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SR+502+%2F+INTERSTATE+5+TO+BATTLE+GROUND+-+ADD+LANES%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 502 CORRIDOR WIDENING, CLARK COUNTY, WASHINGTON (SR 502 / INTERSTATE 5 TO BATTLE GROUND - ADD LANES). [Part 3 of 3] T2 - SR 502 CORRIDOR WIDENING, CLARK COUNTY, WASHINGTON (SR 502 / INTERSTATE 5 TO BATTLE GROUND - ADD LANES). AN - 756827081; 14194-100098_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Safety and capacity improvements to State Route (SR) 502 between Interstate 5 (I-5) and Battle Ground, north Clark County, Washington are proposed. SR 502 is one of two primary routes providing access to the City of Battle Ground and to the regional highway system (I-5) and the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area. The segment proposed for improvement extends five miles between NE 15th Avenue and NE 102nd Avenue. The project corridor is a heavily traveled, two-lane roadway with narrow shoulders and segments which have been designated as high accident corridors. Between 1990 and 2007, Clark County's population grew 74 percent and traffic volumes are projected to nearly triple by the year 2033 compared to 2005 traffic volumes. The range of initial alternatives developed for improving safety and mobility on SR 502 included five on-corridor alternatives, two off-corridor alternatives, and two transportation system management options. The best elements of the on-corridor alternatives and the transportation management alternatives were combined in a hybrid approach. The Build Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and a No Build Alternative are evaluated in this final EIS. The Build Alternative would widen the roadway to provide two lanes in each direction with a median treatment to separate westbound and eastbound traffic. New signals and turn pockets would be added at the intersections at NE 29th Avenue, NE 50th Avenue, NE 92nd Avenue, and the existing signal at NE 72nd Avenue would be improved. Other intersections would be restricted to right-turns only, with u-turns allowed at the four signalized intersections. Paved shoulders would be constructed along both sides of SR 502 for the entire corridor, while sidewalks would be provided in the rural commercially zoned area near Dollars Corner. Construction under the Build Alternative is expected to begin in 2012 and last three years. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternative would improve mobility and safety along the SR 502 corridor and improve regional connectivity between Battle Ground and I-5. Travel speeds under the Build Alternative would average in excess of 28 miles per hour through 2033. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Build Alternative would create 28 acres of new impervious surfaces and would convert 54 to 60 acres of grassland, scrub, forest and riparian land to roadway or related facilities. Two to three acres of potential fish habitat for endangered species would be disturbed and nine to 14 acres of wetlands would be filled. Corridor improvements would result in the conversion of approximately 12 to 16 acres of prime farmland to roadway and storm water facilities, displacement of 22 to 28 businesses and 25 to 35 residences, adverse effects on two historically significant properties, and disturbance of four sites know to contain hazardous materials (primarily petroleum, solvents and metals). LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0303D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100098, Final EIS--346 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, March 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-09-01-F KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Property Disposition KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827081?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+502+CORRIDOR+WIDENING%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SR+502+%2F+INTERSTATE+5+TO+BATTLE+GROUND+-+ADD+LANES%29.&rft.title=SR+502+CORRIDOR+WIDENING%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SR+502+%2F+INTERSTATE+5+TO+BATTLE+GROUND+-+ADD+LANES%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 502 CORRIDOR WIDENING, CLARK COUNTY, WASHINGTON (SR 502 / INTERSTATE 5 TO BATTLE GROUND - ADD LANES). [Part 1 of 3] T2 - SR 502 CORRIDOR WIDENING, CLARK COUNTY, WASHINGTON (SR 502 / INTERSTATE 5 TO BATTLE GROUND - ADD LANES). AN - 756827074; 14194-100098_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Safety and capacity improvements to State Route (SR) 502 between Interstate 5 (I-5) and Battle Ground, north Clark County, Washington are proposed. SR 502 is one of two primary routes providing access to the City of Battle Ground and to the regional highway system (I-5) and the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area. The segment proposed for improvement extends five miles between NE 15th Avenue and NE 102nd Avenue. The project corridor is a heavily traveled, two-lane roadway with narrow shoulders and segments which have been designated as high accident corridors. Between 1990 and 2007, Clark County's population grew 74 percent and traffic volumes are projected to nearly triple by the year 2033 compared to 2005 traffic volumes. The range of initial alternatives developed for improving safety and mobility on SR 502 included five on-corridor alternatives, two off-corridor alternatives, and two transportation system management options. The best elements of the on-corridor alternatives and the transportation management alternatives were combined in a hybrid approach. The Build Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and a No Build Alternative are evaluated in this final EIS. The Build Alternative would widen the roadway to provide two lanes in each direction with a median treatment to separate westbound and eastbound traffic. New signals and turn pockets would be added at the intersections at NE 29th Avenue, NE 50th Avenue, NE 92nd Avenue, and the existing signal at NE 72nd Avenue would be improved. Other intersections would be restricted to right-turns only, with u-turns allowed at the four signalized intersections. Paved shoulders would be constructed along both sides of SR 502 for the entire corridor, while sidewalks would be provided in the rural commercially zoned area near Dollars Corner. Construction under the Build Alternative is expected to begin in 2012 and last three years. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternative would improve mobility and safety along the SR 502 corridor and improve regional connectivity between Battle Ground and I-5. Travel speeds under the Build Alternative would average in excess of 28 miles per hour through 2033. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Build Alternative would create 28 acres of new impervious surfaces and would convert 54 to 60 acres of grassland, scrub, forest and riparian land to roadway or related facilities. Two to three acres of potential fish habitat for endangered species would be disturbed and nine to 14 acres of wetlands would be filled. Corridor improvements would result in the conversion of approximately 12 to 16 acres of prime farmland to roadway and storm water facilities, displacement of 22 to 28 businesses and 25 to 35 residences, adverse effects on two historically significant properties, and disturbance of four sites know to contain hazardous materials (primarily petroleum, solvents and metals). LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0303D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100098, Final EIS--346 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, March 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-09-01-F KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Property Disposition KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827074?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+502+CORRIDOR+WIDENING%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SR+502+%2F+INTERSTATE+5+TO+BATTLE+GROUND+-+ADD+LANES%29.&rft.title=SR+502+CORRIDOR+WIDENING%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SR+502+%2F+INTERSTATE+5+TO+BATTLE+GROUND+-+ADD+LANES%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SR 502 CORRIDOR WIDENING, CLARK COUNTY, WASHINGTON (SR 502 / INTERSTATE 5 TO BATTLE GROUND - ADD LANES). AN - 16384422; 14194 AB - PURPOSE: Safety and capacity improvements to State Route (SR) 502 between Interstate 5 (I-5) and Battle Ground, north Clark County, Washington are proposed. SR 502 is one of two primary routes providing access to the City of Battle Ground and to the regional highway system (I-5) and the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area. The segment proposed for improvement extends five miles between NE 15th Avenue and NE 102nd Avenue. The project corridor is a heavily traveled, two-lane roadway with narrow shoulders and segments which have been designated as high accident corridors. Between 1990 and 2007, Clark County's population grew 74 percent and traffic volumes are projected to nearly triple by the year 2033 compared to 2005 traffic volumes. The range of initial alternatives developed for improving safety and mobility on SR 502 included five on-corridor alternatives, two off-corridor alternatives, and two transportation system management options. The best elements of the on-corridor alternatives and the transportation management alternatives were combined in a hybrid approach. The Build Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, and a No Build Alternative are evaluated in this final EIS. The Build Alternative would widen the roadway to provide two lanes in each direction with a median treatment to separate westbound and eastbound traffic. New signals and turn pockets would be added at the intersections at NE 29th Avenue, NE 50th Avenue, NE 92nd Avenue, and the existing signal at NE 72nd Avenue would be improved. Other intersections would be restricted to right-turns only, with u-turns allowed at the four signalized intersections. Paved shoulders would be constructed along both sides of SR 502 for the entire corridor, while sidewalks would be provided in the rural commercially zoned area near Dollars Corner. Construction under the Build Alternative is expected to begin in 2012 and last three years. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternative would improve mobility and safety along the SR 502 corridor and improve regional connectivity between Battle Ground and I-5. Travel speeds under the Build Alternative would average in excess of 28 miles per hour through 2033. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Build Alternative would create 28 acres of new impervious surfaces and would convert 54 to 60 acres of grassland, scrub, forest and riparian land to roadway or related facilities. Two to three acres of potential fish habitat for endangered species would be disturbed and nine to 14 acres of wetlands would be filled. Corridor improvements would result in the conversion of approximately 12 to 16 acres of prime farmland to roadway and storm water facilities, displacement of 22 to 28 businesses and 25 to 35 residences, adverse effects on two historically significant properties, and disturbance of four sites know to contain hazardous materials (primarily petroleum, solvents and metals). LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0303D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100098, Final EIS--346 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, March 23, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-09-01-F KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Property Disposition KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Threatened Species (Animals) KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16384422?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SR+502+CORRIDOR+WIDENING%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SR+502+%2F+INTERSTATE+5+TO+BATTLE+GROUND+-+ADD+LANES%29.&rft.title=SR+502+CORRIDOR+WIDENING%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28SR+502+%2F+INTERSTATE+5+TO+BATTLE+GROUND+-+ADD+LANES%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 15, NEW LONDON TO GREENVILLE, OUTAGAMIE COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 2 of 4] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 15, NEW LONDON TO GREENVILLE, OUTAGAMIE COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 756827055; 14248-100095_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction and realignment of 11 miles of State Highway (SH) 15 from US 45 in the city of New London to just west of the town of Greenville and SH 76 in Outagamie County, Wisconsin are proposed. SH 15 is a rural highway transitioning to a commuter route between New London and Appleton in northeastern Wisconsin. The village of Hortonville, which lies close to the center for the study corridor, has been experiencing increased traffic congestion for several years. As development continues in the region, traffic volumes will continue to increase. The existing two-lane roadway would fail to meet the need to provide for a smooth, safe flow of traffic, particularly within the village limits of Hortonville. Safety concerns include restricted sign distances at several intersections, limited passing opportunities, and numerous access points that contribute to poor traffic operations. The proposed action would expand SH 15 to a four-lane facility, with the option for a bypass of Hortonville. The corridor has been divided into two sections. The western section begins at the intersection of US 45 and SH 15 in New London and continues 3.4 miles southeastward to the intersection with County T and Givens Road. The eastern section continues 7.3 miles southeastward from the County T/Givens Road intersection through Hortonville to a point east of Julius Road in Greenville. Four eastern section alternatives and two western section options and a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The preferred alternative includes Option A for the western section and Alternative 3 for the eastern section and would follow the existing alignment west and east of Hortonville and a bypass alignment around the north side of Hortonville. Costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $73.2 million in 2008 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The expanded facility would provide for an efficient transportation system for the SH 15 corridor, allowing it to accommodate present and long-term traffic needs while minimizing disturbance to the corridor environment. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 259 acres including 33 acres of wetlands, 175 acres of farmland, 39 acres of upland habitat, and 45 acres of developed and undeveloped urban land. Displacements would include 22 residences and six commercial units. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 44 sensitive receptor sites. Construction would require special provisions to deal with 28 hazardous waste sites. The preferred alternative would affect the main channel of Black Otter Creeek. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0132D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100095, Final EIS--434 pages and maps, Appendices--208 pages, March 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-2006-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827055?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+15%2C+NEW+LONDON+TO+GREENVILLE%2C+OUTAGAMIE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+15%2C+NEW+LONDON+TO+GREENVILLE%2C+OUTAGAMIE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 15, NEW LONDON TO GREENVILLE, OUTAGAMIE COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 1 of 4] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 15, NEW LONDON TO GREENVILLE, OUTAGAMIE COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 756826986; 14248-100095_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction and realignment of 11 miles of State Highway (SH) 15 from US 45 in the city of New London to just west of the town of Greenville and SH 76 in Outagamie County, Wisconsin are proposed. SH 15 is a rural highway transitioning to a commuter route between New London and Appleton in northeastern Wisconsin. The village of Hortonville, which lies close to the center for the study corridor, has been experiencing increased traffic congestion for several years. As development continues in the region, traffic volumes will continue to increase. The existing two-lane roadway would fail to meet the need to provide for a smooth, safe flow of traffic, particularly within the village limits of Hortonville. Safety concerns include restricted sign distances at several intersections, limited passing opportunities, and numerous access points that contribute to poor traffic operations. The proposed action would expand SH 15 to a four-lane facility, with the option for a bypass of Hortonville. The corridor has been divided into two sections. The western section begins at the intersection of US 45 and SH 15 in New London and continues 3.4 miles southeastward to the intersection with County T and Givens Road. The eastern section continues 7.3 miles southeastward from the County T/Givens Road intersection through Hortonville to a point east of Julius Road in Greenville. Four eastern section alternatives and two western section options and a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The preferred alternative includes Option A for the western section and Alternative 3 for the eastern section and would follow the existing alignment west and east of Hortonville and a bypass alignment around the north side of Hortonville. Costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $73.2 million in 2008 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The expanded facility would provide for an efficient transportation system for the SH 15 corridor, allowing it to accommodate present and long-term traffic needs while minimizing disturbance to the corridor environment. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 259 acres including 33 acres of wetlands, 175 acres of farmland, 39 acres of upland habitat, and 45 acres of developed and undeveloped urban land. Displacements would include 22 residences and six commercial units. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 44 sensitive receptor sites. Construction would require special provisions to deal with 28 hazardous waste sites. The preferred alternative would affect the main channel of Black Otter Creeek. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0132D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100095, Final EIS--434 pages and maps, Appendices--208 pages, March 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-2006-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826986?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+15%2C+NEW+LONDON+TO+GREENVILLE%2C+OUTAGAMIE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+15%2C+NEW+LONDON+TO+GREENVILLE%2C+OUTAGAMIE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 15, NEW LONDON TO GREENVILLE, OUTAGAMIE COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 3 of 4] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 15, NEW LONDON TO GREENVILLE, OUTAGAMIE COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 756826914; 14248-100095_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction and realignment of 11 miles of State Highway (SH) 15 from US 45 in the city of New London to just west of the town of Greenville and SH 76 in Outagamie County, Wisconsin are proposed. SH 15 is a rural highway transitioning to a commuter route between New London and Appleton in northeastern Wisconsin. The village of Hortonville, which lies close to the center for the study corridor, has been experiencing increased traffic congestion for several years. As development continues in the region, traffic volumes will continue to increase. The existing two-lane roadway would fail to meet the need to provide for a smooth, safe flow of traffic, particularly within the village limits of Hortonville. Safety concerns include restricted sign distances at several intersections, limited passing opportunities, and numerous access points that contribute to poor traffic operations. The proposed action would expand SH 15 to a four-lane facility, with the option for a bypass of Hortonville. The corridor has been divided into two sections. The western section begins at the intersection of US 45 and SH 15 in New London and continues 3.4 miles southeastward to the intersection with County T and Givens Road. The eastern section continues 7.3 miles southeastward from the County T/Givens Road intersection through Hortonville to a point east of Julius Road in Greenville. Four eastern section alternatives and two western section options and a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The preferred alternative includes Option A for the western section and Alternative 3 for the eastern section and would follow the existing alignment west and east of Hortonville and a bypass alignment around the north side of Hortonville. Costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $73.2 million in 2008 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The expanded facility would provide for an efficient transportation system for the SH 15 corridor, allowing it to accommodate present and long-term traffic needs while minimizing disturbance to the corridor environment. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 259 acres including 33 acres of wetlands, 175 acres of farmland, 39 acres of upland habitat, and 45 acres of developed and undeveloped urban land. Displacements would include 22 residences and six commercial units. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 44 sensitive receptor sites. Construction would require special provisions to deal with 28 hazardous waste sites. The preferred alternative would affect the main channel of Black Otter Creeek. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0132D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100095, Final EIS--434 pages and maps, Appendices--208 pages, March 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-2006-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826914?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+15%2C+NEW+LONDON+TO+GREENVILLE%2C+OUTAGAMIE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+15%2C+NEW+LONDON+TO+GREENVILLE%2C+OUTAGAMIE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 15, NEW LONDON TO GREENVILLE, OUTAGAMIE COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 4 of 4] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 15, NEW LONDON TO GREENVILLE, OUTAGAMIE COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 756826634; 14248-100095_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction and realignment of 11 miles of State Highway (SH) 15 from US 45 in the city of New London to just west of the town of Greenville and SH 76 in Outagamie County, Wisconsin are proposed. SH 15 is a rural highway transitioning to a commuter route between New London and Appleton in northeastern Wisconsin. The village of Hortonville, which lies close to the center for the study corridor, has been experiencing increased traffic congestion for several years. As development continues in the region, traffic volumes will continue to increase. The existing two-lane roadway would fail to meet the need to provide for a smooth, safe flow of traffic, particularly within the village limits of Hortonville. Safety concerns include restricted sign distances at several intersections, limited passing opportunities, and numerous access points that contribute to poor traffic operations. The proposed action would expand SH 15 to a four-lane facility, with the option for a bypass of Hortonville. The corridor has been divided into two sections. The western section begins at the intersection of US 45 and SH 15 in New London and continues 3.4 miles southeastward to the intersection with County T and Givens Road. The eastern section continues 7.3 miles southeastward from the County T/Givens Road intersection through Hortonville to a point east of Julius Road in Greenville. Four eastern section alternatives and two western section options and a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The preferred alternative includes Option A for the western section and Alternative 3 for the eastern section and would follow the existing alignment west and east of Hortonville and a bypass alignment around the north side of Hortonville. Costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $73.2 million in 2008 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The expanded facility would provide for an efficient transportation system for the SH 15 corridor, allowing it to accommodate present and long-term traffic needs while minimizing disturbance to the corridor environment. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 259 acres including 33 acres of wetlands, 175 acres of farmland, 39 acres of upland habitat, and 45 acres of developed and undeveloped urban land. Displacements would include 22 residences and six commercial units. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 44 sensitive receptor sites. Construction would require special provisions to deal with 28 hazardous waste sites. The preferred alternative would affect the main channel of Black Otter Creeek. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0132D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100095, Final EIS--434 pages and maps, Appendices--208 pages, March 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-2006-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826634?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+15%2C+NEW+LONDON+TO+GREENVILLE%2C+OUTAGAMIE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+15%2C+NEW+LONDON+TO+GREENVILLE%2C+OUTAGAMIE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 15, NEW LONDON TO GREENVILLE, OUTAGAMIE COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 16384043; 14248 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction and realignment of 11 miles of State Highway (SH) 15 from US 45 in the city of New London to just west of the town of Greenville and SH 76 in Outagamie County, Wisconsin are proposed. SH 15 is a rural highway transitioning to a commuter route between New London and Appleton in northeastern Wisconsin. The village of Hortonville, which lies close to the center for the study corridor, has been experiencing increased traffic congestion for several years. As development continues in the region, traffic volumes will continue to increase. The existing two-lane roadway would fail to meet the need to provide for a smooth, safe flow of traffic, particularly within the village limits of Hortonville. Safety concerns include restricted sign distances at several intersections, limited passing opportunities, and numerous access points that contribute to poor traffic operations. The proposed action would expand SH 15 to a four-lane facility, with the option for a bypass of Hortonville. The corridor has been divided into two sections. The western section begins at the intersection of US 45 and SH 15 in New London and continues 3.4 miles southeastward to the intersection with County T and Givens Road. The eastern section continues 7.3 miles southeastward from the County T/Givens Road intersection through Hortonville to a point east of Julius Road in Greenville. Four eastern section alternatives and two western section options and a No-Build Alternative are considered in this final EIS. The preferred alternative includes Option A for the western section and Alternative 3 for the eastern section and would follow the existing alignment west and east of Hortonville and a bypass alignment around the north side of Hortonville. Costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $73.2 million in 2008 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The expanded facility would provide for an efficient transportation system for the SH 15 corridor, allowing it to accommodate present and long-term traffic needs while minimizing disturbance to the corridor environment. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 259 acres including 33 acres of wetlands, 175 acres of farmland, 39 acres of upland habitat, and 45 acres of developed and undeveloped urban land. Displacements would include 22 residences and six commercial units. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at 44 sensitive receptor sites. Construction would require special provisions to deal with 28 hazardous waste sites. The preferred alternative would affect the main channel of Black Otter Creeek. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0132D, Volume 31, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100095, Final EIS--434 pages and maps, Appendices--208 pages, March 19, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-2006-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16384043?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+15%2C+NEW+LONDON+TO+GREENVILLE%2C+OUTAGAMIE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+15%2C+NEW+LONDON+TO+GREENVILLE%2C+OUTAGAMIE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 876254335; 14242-9_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska. The proposed project would connect Port MacKenzie, the closest deep-water port to Interior Alaska, with the existing ARRC rail system. The Port's market includes bulk commodities, iron or steel materials, vehicles and heavy equipment, and mobile or modular buildings. The nearest other port in the area is the Port of Anchorage, which is an additional 35 miles from the Alaska interior. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two southern segment alternatives, three northern segment alternatives, and three connector segments. The southern segments, Mac West and Mac East, would run either east or west of the Port MacKenzie Agricultural Project. Three possible main segments north of the Port MacKenzie Agricultural Project are Willow, Houston, and Big Lake, with Houston having north and south variants. Connector segments would link the north and south segments to create eight possible alternatives for the proposed rail line with route mileage ranging from 31.4 miles to 46.0 miles. Although all of the proposed rail line segments are technically feasible to build, only the Mac East-Big Lake alternative and the Mac East-Connector 3-Houston-Houston South alternative would result in minimal impacts on three recreation areas, one game refuge, and 13 officially recognized trails in the project area. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: All of the proposed alternative rail line segments would cross 100-year floodplains. Wetland impacts would range from 188 acres to 478 acres. Vegetation clearing would result in long-term impact for forest communities, especially for late-succession forests and wetlands. Clearing and grading, excavation, and construction could impact water resources. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Loss of wildlife habitat would range from 930 acres to 1,272 acres, but would still be less than one percent of the 435,895 acres of available habitat in the study area. The proposed action could affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Cook Inlet beluga whale. The Big Lake segment would require taking 17 residences and three structures, the Connector 3 segment would displace two structures, and the Mac East segment would displace one residence. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. Archaeological sites, historic sites, cultural landscapes, and traditional cultural properties could be affected. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100089, Draft EIS--603 pages and CD-ROM, Appendices--CD-ROM, March 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254335?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 876254332; 14242-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska. The proposed project would connect Port MacKenzie, the closest deep-water port to Interior Alaska, with the existing ARRC rail system. The Port's market includes bulk commodities, iron or steel materials, vehicles and heavy equipment, and mobile or modular buildings. The nearest other port in the area is the Port of Anchorage, which is an additional 35 miles from the Alaska interior. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two southern segment alternatives, three northern segment alternatives, and three connector segments. The southern segments, Mac West and Mac East, would run either east or west of the Port MacKenzie Agricultural Project. Three possible main segments north of the Port MacKenzie Agricultural Project are Willow, Houston, and Big Lake, with Houston having north and south variants. Connector segments would link the north and south segments to create eight possible alternatives for the proposed rail line with route mileage ranging from 31.4 miles to 46.0 miles. Although all of the proposed rail line segments are technically feasible to build, only the Mac East-Big Lake alternative and the Mac East-Connector 3-Houston-Houston South alternative would result in minimal impacts on three recreation areas, one game refuge, and 13 officially recognized trails in the project area. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: All of the proposed alternative rail line segments would cross 100-year floodplains. Wetland impacts would range from 188 acres to 478 acres. Vegetation clearing would result in long-term impact for forest communities, especially for late-succession forests and wetlands. Clearing and grading, excavation, and construction could impact water resources. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Loss of wildlife habitat would range from 930 acres to 1,272 acres, but would still be less than one percent of the 435,895 acres of available habitat in the study area. The proposed action could affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Cook Inlet beluga whale. The Big Lake segment would require taking 17 residences and three structures, the Connector 3 segment would displace two structures, and the Mac East segment would displace one residence. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. Archaeological sites, historic sites, cultural landscapes, and traditional cultural properties could be affected. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100089, Draft EIS--603 pages and CD-ROM, Appendices--CD-ROM, March 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254332?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A RAIL LINE EXTENSION TO PORT MACKENZIE, ALASKA. AN - 16385837; 14242 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of 30 to 45 miles of rail line between the Port MacKenzie District in Matanuska-Susitna Borough and a point just north of Willow, Alaska are proposed. On December 5, 2008, the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) filed a petition for the Port MacKenzie rail extension to provide freight services between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska. The proposed project would connect Port MacKenzie, the closest deep-water port to Interior Alaska, with the existing ARRC rail system. The Port's market includes bulk commodities, iron or steel materials, vehicles and heavy equipment, and mobile or modular buildings. The nearest other port in the area is the Port of Anchorage, which is an additional 35 miles from the Alaska interior. Port MacKenzie is situated on nearly 9,000 acres of land and has an existing dockside bulk materials loading capacity with a conveyor system. Unlike similar port facilities that serve large, ocean-going vehicles, Port MacKenzie does not have rail service. Under the proposed action, ARRC would construct and operate a single-track rail line with a right-of-way (ROW) of 200 feet which would contain a power line, buried utility lines, and an access road. In addition, ARRC would construct one rail line siding within the exiting main line ROW at the tie-in location with the rail extension. The rail line would be constructed and maintained to Class 4 standards with a 60-mile-per-hour operating speed for freight service. Operations support facilities would be constructed and a terminal reserve area along the southern terminus of the line would eventually consist of yard sidings, storage areas, and a terminal building to support train maintenance. In addition to a No Action Alternative, this draft EIS considers two southern segment alternatives, three northern segment alternatives, and three connector segments. The southern segments, Mac West and Mac East, would run either east or west of the Port MacKenzie Agricultural Project. Three possible main segments north of the Port MacKenzie Agricultural Project are Willow, Houston, and Big Lake, with Houston having north and south variants. Connector segments would link the north and south segments to create eight possible alternatives for the proposed rail line with route mileage ranging from 31.4 miles to 46.0 miles. Although all of the proposed rail line segments are technically feasible to build, only the Mac East-Big Lake alternative and the Mac East-Connector 3-Houston-Houston South alternative would result in minimal impacts on three recreation areas, one game refuge, and 13 officially recognized trails in the project area. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would improve efficiency for freight shipping between Port MacKenzie and Interior Alaska and result in a temporary stimulus to the local economy and labor market with an estimated 66 to 100 workers added over a two-year construction period. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: All of the proposed alternative rail line segments would cross 100-year floodplains. Wetland impacts would range from 188 acres to 478 acres. Vegetation clearing would result in long-term impact for forest communities, especially for late-succession forests and wetlands. Clearing and grading, excavation, and construction could impact water resources. Culvert and bridge construction could degrade riparian areas with consequent loss of fish habitat, increase stages and velocities of floodwater, increase channel scour and downstream sedimentation, and change natural drainage. Loss of wildlife habitat would range from 930 acres to 1,272 acres, but would still be less than one percent of the 435,895 acres of available habitat in the study area. The proposed action could affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Cook Inlet beluga whale. The Big Lake segment would require taking 17 residences and three structures, the Connector 3 segment would displace two structures, and the Mac East segment would displace one residence. Seismic activity could misalign or damage tracks, the railbed, or the access road. Archaeological sites, historic sites, cultural landscapes, and traditional cultural properties could be affected. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100089, Draft EIS--603 pages and CD-ROM, Appendices--CD-ROM, March 16, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 6(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Alaska KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16385837?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.title=ALASKA+RAILROAD+CORPORATION+CONSTRUCTION+AND+OPERATION+OF+A+RAIL+LINE+EXTENSION+TO+PORT+MACKENZIE%2C+ALASKA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Rehabilitation of a Historical Bridge Exhibiting Severe Corrosion Damage in Florida T2 - 2010 CORROSION Conference and Expo AN - 754155477; 5711002 JF - 2010 CORROSION Conference and Expo AU - Kessler, Richard AU - Lasa, Ivan AU - Paredes, Mario Y1 - 2010/03/14/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Mar 14 KW - USA, Florida KW - Corrosion KW - Historical account KW - Rehabilitation KW - U 7000:Multidisciplinary UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754155477?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2010+CORROSION+Conference+and+Expo&rft.atitle=Rehabilitation+of+a+Historical+Bridge+Exhibiting+Severe+Corrosion+Damage+in+Florida&rft.au=Kessler%2C+Richard%3BLasa%2C+Ivan%3BParedes%2C+Mario&rft.aulast=Kessler&rft.aufirst=Richard&rft.date=2010-03-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2010+CORROSION+Conference+and+Expo&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://nace.confex.com/nace/2010/webprogram/TECHNICAL.html LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-08-02 N1 - Last updated - 2010-09-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 1 of 3] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756826957; 14228-100074_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right of way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right of way at interchanges along I-70. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the identified preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including include relocations and increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100074, 706 pages and maps, March 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-D KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826957?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 3 of 3] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756826920; 14228-100074_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right of way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right of way at interchanges along I-70. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the identified preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including include relocations and increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100074, 706 pages and maps, March 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-D KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826920?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 2 of 3] T2 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756826620; 14228-100074_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right of way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right of way at interchanges along I-70. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the identified preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including include relocations and increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100074, 706 pages and maps, March 9, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-D KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826620?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - FUTURE I-70 KANSAS CITY METRO PROJECT, KANSAS CITY, JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI (FIRST TIER DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 16384612; 14228 AB - PURPOSE: Improvement of the Interstate 70 (I-70) corridor from the Kansas state line to east of I-470, including the Kansas City downtown loop, in Jackson County, Missouri is proposed. The 18-mile I-70 corridor and the entire downtown loop are vital to serving regional transportation needs and I-70 in the Kansas City metropolitan area (KC Metro) is also the main artery for traffic bound for major cities and towns in Missouri and the adjacent states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois. I-70 is a four-lane or six-lane divided and fully access-controlled interstate facility. The study area includes all land within 100 feet of the existing highway right of way along the corridor and within 300 feet of the existing highway right of way at interchanges along I-70. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The improvement strategy would reduce crash rates, remove key bottlenecks, reduce the potential for ramp back-up onto the freeway, improve multi-modal travel times, restore and maintain bridge and pavement conditions, increase safe access across I-70 and the downtown loop for non-motorized travel, and improve the efficiency of freight movement. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the identified preferred strategy would require the relocation of 228 single-family homes, 19 multi-family buildings, 67 businesses, and four community facilities, based upon the widest strategy footprint carried forward. Three downtown parks could be affected. Impervious surface, rainwater runoff, and noise levels are expected to increase. The build strategies could have adverse effects, including include relocations and increased noise, on minorities and low-income persons living along the corridor. LEGAL MANDATES: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100074, 706 pages and maps, March 9, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MO-EIS-10-01-D KW - Central Business Districts KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Missouri KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16384612?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=FUTURE+I-70+KANSAS+CITY+METRO+PROJECT%2C+KANSAS+CITY%2C+JACKSON+COUNTY%2C+MISSOURI+%28FIRST+TIER+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Jefferson City, Missouri; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: March 9, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Nanoscale research in a strategy for the transportation system to meet a new era T2 - 2010 SPIE Symposium on Smart Structures and Materials & Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring (SPIE Smart Structures/NDE 2010) AN - 742799771; 5682102 JF - 2010 SPIE Symposium on Smart Structures and Materials & Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring (SPIE Smart Structures/NDE 2010) AU - Lee, Kunik Y1 - 2010/03/07/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Mar 07 KW - Transportation KW - U 2000:Biological Sciences UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/742799771?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2010+SPIE+Symposium+on+Smart+Structures+and+Materials+%26+Nondestructive+Evaluation+and+Health+Monitoring+%28SPIE+Smart+Structures%2FNDE+2010%29&rft.atitle=Nanoscale+research+in+a+strategy+for+the+transportation+system+to+meet+a+new+era&rft.au=Lee%2C+Kunik&rft.aulast=Lee&rft.aufirst=Kunik&rft.date=2010-03-07&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2010+SPIE+Symposium+on+Smart+Structures+and+Materials+%26+Nondestructive+Evaluation+and+Health+Monitoring+%28SPIE+Smart+Structures%2FNDE+2010%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://spie.org/Documents/ConferencesExhibitions/ssnde10-final-L.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-05-17 N1 - Last updated - 2010-08-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 395 (I-395) FROM THE I-95 MIDTOWN INTERCHANGE RAMPS TO MACARTHUR CAUSEWAY WEST CHANNEL BRIDGES AT BISCAYNE BAY, CITY OF MIAMI, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - INTERSTATE 395 (I-395) FROM THE I-95 MIDTOWN INTERCHANGE RAMPS TO MACARTHUR CAUSEWAY WEST CHANNEL BRIDGES AT BISCAYNE BAY, CITY OF MIAMI, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 756827048; 14220-100066_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Reconstruction of the Interstate 395 (I-395) corridor, from the original terminus at the west side of the I-95 Midtown Interchange to the original corridor terminus at the West Channel Bridges at Biscayne Bay in the City of Miami, Miami-Dade County, Florida is proposed. The land surrounding the project corridor is currently undergoing a considerable amount of urban redevelopment. I-395 is an independent facility linking I-95 to the south and north, State Route 836 (SR-836) to the west, and the MacArthur Causeway/US-41 to the east over Biscayne Bay. It serves as the emergency evacuation route for the southern part of Miami Beach and for Star, Hibiscus and Palm Islands. The existing 1.4-mile corridor is elevated through the Overtown and Edgewater neighborhoods, with four through lanes and ramps for interchanges at I-95, NE 1st Avenue, NE 2nd Avenue, and US-1/Biscayne Boulevard. Initially, four construction alternatives were advanced including two elevated designs, a tunnel, and an open cut. All four alternatives would reuse the existing corridor with a slight alignment shift to the north of the existing facility. Alternative 2, an elevated design with ramps at the Midtown Interchange was rejected by the Overtown community and deemed to be fatally flawed. The two depressed designs, Alternatives 4 and 5, were determined to be not viable. The remaining viable alternatives considered in this final EIS are the No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1) and Alternative 3, an elevated design with ramps at Miami Avenue. Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative and construction would begin with the westbound part of the expressway being built to the north, with a new N. Miami Avenue Interchange replacing all the existing ramps at the NE 1st Avenue and NE 2nd Avenue Interchanges. The eastbound facility would then be built in place of the existing roadway. The mainlines forming most of the expressway would be elevated on two bridge structures, with a minimum of 17 feet and maximum of 33.5 feet clearance over street grade. Only the ramps at N. Miami Avenue would involve solid embankment. One street, NE 1st Court, would be closed to accommodate the ramps. Another local street, NE Miami Court, would be available for reconnection under the I-395 spans. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address deficiencies in capacity, geometrics, and safety along the existing I-395 corridor which has only two through lanes, only one continuous lane in each direction, both left-hand and right-hand ramps, and unexpected merges and lane drops. The increase in capacity from two to three lanes for through traffic would benefit Miami Beach traffic flow. Safety would be improved by a reduction in the weaving of traffic and better management of cars and trucks through lane continuity. Both the capacity and safety improvements would benefit emergency hurricane evacuation. The potential for reconnected surface streets under the corridor could contribute to easier neighborhood access and improved community continuity. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The specific right-of-way needs of Alternative 3 would require acquisition of 10 additional parcels that were not acquired through advance acquisition and include a warehouse, a commercial site, a partial clip of an industrial site, and several vacant parcels. Relocations would affect ten families or individuals, five businesses or services, and one former house of worship. Large scale impacts would occur from construction, but planning and scheduling would minimize traffic delays. LEGAL MANDATES: Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0311D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100066, 381 pages and maps, March 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-FL-EIS-09-01-F KW - Bays KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hurricanes KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Renewal KW - Biscayne Bay KW - Florida KW - Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827048?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+395+%28I-395%29+FROM+THE+I-95+MIDTOWN+INTERCHANGE+RAMPS+TO+MACARTHUR+CAUSEWAY+WEST+CHANNEL+BRIDGES+AT+BISCAYNE+BAY%2C+CITY+OF+MIAMI%2C+MIAMI-DADE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+395+%28I-395%29+FROM+THE+I-95+MIDTOWN+INTERCHANGE+RAMPS+TO+MACARTHUR+CAUSEWAY+WEST+CHANNEL+BRIDGES+AT+BISCAYNE+BAY%2C+CITY+OF+MIAMI%2C+MIAMI-DADE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 395 (I-395) FROM THE I-95 MIDTOWN INTERCHANGE RAMPS TO MACARTHUR CAUSEWAY WEST CHANNEL BRIDGES AT BISCAYNE BAY, CITY OF MIAMI, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - INTERSTATE 395 (I-395) FROM THE I-95 MIDTOWN INTERCHANGE RAMPS TO MACARTHUR CAUSEWAY WEST CHANNEL BRIDGES AT BISCAYNE BAY, CITY OF MIAMI, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 756826908; 14220-100066_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Reconstruction of the Interstate 395 (I-395) corridor, from the original terminus at the west side of the I-95 Midtown Interchange to the original corridor terminus at the West Channel Bridges at Biscayne Bay in the City of Miami, Miami-Dade County, Florida is proposed. The land surrounding the project corridor is currently undergoing a considerable amount of urban redevelopment. I-395 is an independent facility linking I-95 to the south and north, State Route 836 (SR-836) to the west, and the MacArthur Causeway/US-41 to the east over Biscayne Bay. It serves as the emergency evacuation route for the southern part of Miami Beach and for Star, Hibiscus and Palm Islands. The existing 1.4-mile corridor is elevated through the Overtown and Edgewater neighborhoods, with four through lanes and ramps for interchanges at I-95, NE 1st Avenue, NE 2nd Avenue, and US-1/Biscayne Boulevard. Initially, four construction alternatives were advanced including two elevated designs, a tunnel, and an open cut. All four alternatives would reuse the existing corridor with a slight alignment shift to the north of the existing facility. Alternative 2, an elevated design with ramps at the Midtown Interchange was rejected by the Overtown community and deemed to be fatally flawed. The two depressed designs, Alternatives 4 and 5, were determined to be not viable. The remaining viable alternatives considered in this final EIS are the No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1) and Alternative 3, an elevated design with ramps at Miami Avenue. Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative and construction would begin with the westbound part of the expressway being built to the north, with a new N. Miami Avenue Interchange replacing all the existing ramps at the NE 1st Avenue and NE 2nd Avenue Interchanges. The eastbound facility would then be built in place of the existing roadway. The mainlines forming most of the expressway would be elevated on two bridge structures, with a minimum of 17 feet and maximum of 33.5 feet clearance over street grade. Only the ramps at N. Miami Avenue would involve solid embankment. One street, NE 1st Court, would be closed to accommodate the ramps. Another local street, NE Miami Court, would be available for reconnection under the I-395 spans. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address deficiencies in capacity, geometrics, and safety along the existing I-395 corridor which has only two through lanes, only one continuous lane in each direction, both left-hand and right-hand ramps, and unexpected merges and lane drops. The increase in capacity from two to three lanes for through traffic would benefit Miami Beach traffic flow. Safety would be improved by a reduction in the weaving of traffic and better management of cars and trucks through lane continuity. Both the capacity and safety improvements would benefit emergency hurricane evacuation. The potential for reconnected surface streets under the corridor could contribute to easier neighborhood access and improved community continuity. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The specific right-of-way needs of Alternative 3 would require acquisition of 10 additional parcels that were not acquired through advance acquisition and include a warehouse, a commercial site, a partial clip of an industrial site, and several vacant parcels. Relocations would affect ten families or individuals, five businesses or services, and one former house of worship. Large scale impacts would occur from construction, but planning and scheduling would minimize traffic delays. LEGAL MANDATES: Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0311D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100066, 381 pages and maps, March 3, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-FL-EIS-09-01-F KW - Bays KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hurricanes KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Renewal KW - Biscayne Bay KW - Florida KW - Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826908?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+395+%28I-395%29+FROM+THE+I-95+MIDTOWN+INTERCHANGE+RAMPS+TO+MACARTHUR+CAUSEWAY+WEST+CHANNEL+BRIDGES+AT+BISCAYNE+BAY%2C+CITY+OF+MIAMI%2C+MIAMI-DADE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+395+%28I-395%29+FROM+THE+I-95+MIDTOWN+INTERCHANGE+RAMPS+TO+MACARTHUR+CAUSEWAY+WEST+CHANNEL+BRIDGES+AT+BISCAYNE+BAY%2C+CITY+OF+MIAMI%2C+MIAMI-DADE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 395 (I-395) FROM THE I-95 MIDTOWN INTERCHANGE RAMPS TO MACARTHUR CAUSEWAY WEST CHANNEL BRIDGES AT BISCAYNE BAY, CITY OF MIAMI, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 16383857; 14220 AB - PURPOSE: Reconstruction of the Interstate 395 (I-395) corridor, from the original terminus at the west side of the I-95 Midtown Interchange to the original corridor terminus at the West Channel Bridges at Biscayne Bay in the City of Miami, Miami-Dade County, Florida is proposed. The land surrounding the project corridor is currently undergoing a considerable amount of urban redevelopment. I-395 is an independent facility linking I-95 to the south and north, State Route 836 (SR-836) to the west, and the MacArthur Causeway/US-41 to the east over Biscayne Bay. It serves as the emergency evacuation route for the southern part of Miami Beach and for Star, Hibiscus and Palm Islands. The existing 1.4-mile corridor is elevated through the Overtown and Edgewater neighborhoods, with four through lanes and ramps for interchanges at I-95, NE 1st Avenue, NE 2nd Avenue, and US-1/Biscayne Boulevard. Initially, four construction alternatives were advanced including two elevated designs, a tunnel, and an open cut. All four alternatives would reuse the existing corridor with a slight alignment shift to the north of the existing facility. Alternative 2, an elevated design with ramps at the Midtown Interchange was rejected by the Overtown community and deemed to be fatally flawed. The two depressed designs, Alternatives 4 and 5, were determined to be not viable. The remaining viable alternatives considered in this final EIS are the No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1) and Alternative 3, an elevated design with ramps at Miami Avenue. Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative and construction would begin with the westbound part of the expressway being built to the north, with a new N. Miami Avenue Interchange replacing all the existing ramps at the NE 1st Avenue and NE 2nd Avenue Interchanges. The eastbound facility would then be built in place of the existing roadway. The mainlines forming most of the expressway would be elevated on two bridge structures, with a minimum of 17 feet and maximum of 33.5 feet clearance over street grade. Only the ramps at N. Miami Avenue would involve solid embankment. One street, NE 1st Court, would be closed to accommodate the ramps. Another local street, NE Miami Court, would be available for reconnection under the I-395 spans. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address deficiencies in capacity, geometrics, and safety along the existing I-395 corridor which has only two through lanes, only one continuous lane in each direction, both left-hand and right-hand ramps, and unexpected merges and lane drops. The increase in capacity from two to three lanes for through traffic would benefit Miami Beach traffic flow. Safety would be improved by a reduction in the weaving of traffic and better management of cars and trucks through lane continuity. Both the capacity and safety improvements would benefit emergency hurricane evacuation. The potential for reconnected surface streets under the corridor could contribute to easier neighborhood access and improved community continuity. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The specific right-of-way needs of Alternative 3 would require acquisition of 10 additional parcels that were not acquired through advance acquisition and include a warehouse, a commercial site, a partial clip of an industrial site, and several vacant parcels. Relocations would affect ten families or individuals, five businesses or services, and one former house of worship. Large scale impacts would occur from construction, but planning and scheduling would minimize traffic delays. LEGAL MANDATES: Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0311D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100066, 381 pages and maps, March 3, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-FL-EIS-09-01-F KW - Bays KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hurricanes KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Renewal KW - Biscayne Bay KW - Florida KW - Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16383857?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-03&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+395+%28I-395%29+FROM+THE+I-95+MIDTOWN+INTERCHANGE+RAMPS+TO+MACARTHUR+CAUSEWAY+WEST+CHANNEL+BRIDGES+AT+BISCAYNE+BAY%2C+CITY+OF+MIAMI%2C+MIAMI-DADE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+395+%28I-395%29+FROM+THE+I-95+MIDTOWN+INTERCHANGE+RAMPS+TO+MACARTHUR+CAUSEWAY+WEST+CHANNEL+BRIDGES+AT+BISCAYNE+BAY%2C+CITY+OF+MIAMI%2C+MIAMI-DADE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-11 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: March 3, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - A comparative analysis of hotspot identification methods AN - 877574138; 13019339 AB - The identification of crash hotspots is the first step of the highway safety management process. Errors in hotspot identification may result in the inefficient use of resources for safety improvements and may reduce the global effectiveness of the safety management process. Despite the importance of using effective hotspot identification (HSID) methods, only a few researchers have compared the performance of various methods. In this research, seven commonly applied HSID methods were compared against four robust and informative quantitative evaluation criteria. The following HSID methods were compared: crash frequency (CF), equivalent property damage only (EPDO) crash frequency, crash rate (CR), proportion method (P), empirical Bayes estimate of total-crash frequency (EB), empirical Bayes estimate of severe-crash frequency (EBs), and potential for improvement (PFI). The HSID methods were compared using the site consistency test, the method consistency test, the total rank differences test, and the total score test. These tests evaluate each HSID method's performance in a variety of areas, such as efficiency in identifying sites that show consistently poor safety performance, reliability in identifying the same hotspots in subsequent time periods, and ranking consistency. To evaluate the HSID methods, five years of crash data from the Italian motorway A16 were used. The quantitative evaluation tests showed that the EB method performs better than the other HSID methods. Test results highlight that the EB method is the most consistent and reliable method for identifying priority investigation locations. The EB expected frequency of total-crashes (EB) performed better than the EB expected frequency of severe-crashes (EBs), although the results differed only slightly when the number of identified hotspots increased. The CF method performed better than other HSID methods with more appealing theoretical arguments. In particular, the CF method performed better than the CR method. This result is quite alarming, since many agencies use the CR method. The PFI and EPDO methods were largely inconsistent. The proportion method performed worst in all of the tests. Overall, these results are consistent with the results of previous studies. The identification of engineering countermeasures that may reduce crashes was successful in all of the hotspots identified with the EB method; this finding shows that the identified hotspots can also be corrected. The advantages associated with the EB method were based on crash data from one Italian motorway, and the relative performances of HSID methods may change when using other crash data. However, the study results are very significant and are consistent with earlier findings. To further clarify the benefits of the EB method, this study should be replicated in other countries. Nevertheless, the study results, combined with previous research results, strongly suggest that the EB method should be the standard in the identification of hotspots. JF - Accident Analysis & Prevention AU - Montella, Alfonso AD - University of Naples Federico II, Department of Transportation Engineering "Luigi Tocchetti", Via Claudio 21, 80125 Naples, Italy, alfonso.montella@unina.it Y1 - 2010/03// PY - 2010 DA - Mar 2010 SP - 571 EP - 581 PB - Elsevier Science, P.O. Box 800 Kidlington Oxford OX5 1DX UK VL - 42 IS - 2 SN - 0001-4575, 0001-4575 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/877574138?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahealthsafetyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Accident+Analysis+%26+Prevention&rft.atitle=A+comparative+analysis+of+hotspot+identification+methods&rft.au=Montella%2C+Alfonso&rft.aulast=Montella&rft.aufirst=Alfonso&rft.date=2010-03-01&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=571&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Accident+Analysis+%26+Prevention&rft.issn=00014575&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.aap.2009.09.025 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-15 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2009.09.025 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - Early Estimate of Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities in 2009 AN - 746303389; 12578273 AB - A statistical projection of traffic fatalities in 2009 shows that an estimated 33,963 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes. This represents a decline of about 8.9 percent as compared to the 37,261 fatalities that occurred in 2008, as shown in Table 1. If these projections are realized, fatalities will be the lowest on record (since 1954). Also in 2009, fatalities declined by about 10.7 percent in the first quarter, declined by about 4.8 percent in the second quarter, declined by about 7.5 percent in the third quarter, and declined by about 12.7 percent in the fourth quarter, as compared to the respective quarters in 2008. The fourth quarter of 2009 will be the 15th consecutive quarter of declines in fatalities as compared to the same quarter from the previous year. Traffic fatalities have been steadily declining since reaching a near-term peak in 2005, decreasing by about 22 percent from 2005 to 2009. Preliminary data reported by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) shows that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in 2009 increased by about 6.6 billion miles, or about a 0.2-percent increase. On a quarterly basis, the VMT dropped by 1.6 percent during the first quarter and increased by 0.6 percent in the second quarter, increased by 1.7 percent in the third quarter, and increased by 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter. JF - Early Estimate of Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities in 2009. 2 pp. Mar 2010. Y1 - 2010/03// PY - 2010 DA - Mar 2010 SP - 2 PB - U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington DC 20590 USA KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Mortality KW - Injuries KW - Motor vehicles KW - Traffic safety KW - Highways KW - H 11000:Diseases/Injuries/Trauma UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/746303389?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Health+%26+Safety+Science+Abstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-03-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=2&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=Early+Estimate+of+Motor+Vehicle+Traffic+Fatalities+in+2009&rft.title=Early+Estimate+of+Motor+Vehicle+Traffic+Fatalities+in+2009&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-04-01 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-14 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - High-speed rail in Taiwan: New experience and issues for future development AN - 58837979; 2010-480214 AB - This study aims to identify some possible issues and challenges for Taiwan's High Speed Rail (HSR) system, which was constructed and is operated under a Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) model. The operational experiences in the initial stage for equivalent systems in Japan, France, Germany, and elsewhere are introduced herein. This study first presents Taiwan's HSR system development and conducts an ex post cost-benefit analysis of this transportation system. Second, unsatisfied ridership is examined to look for possible solutions to increase it. Third, the paper examines the impact of HSR on the intercity transportation market. Finally, the integration between HSR and various existing transportation modes is discussed. Several policy suggestions are included, which are useful for the decision makers of transportation systems' entrepreneurs, the central government, and the local authorities to derive a comprehensive post-HSR planning strategy for a more integrated transportation system. [Copyright Elsevier B.V.] JF - Transport Policy AU - Cheng, Yung-Hsiang AD - National Cheng Kung University, Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, No. 1, University Road, Tainan City 701, Taiwan yhcheng@mail.ncku.edu.tw Y1 - 2010/03// PY - 2010 DA - March 2010 SP - 51 EP - 63 PB - Elsevier Ltd, The Netherlands VL - 17 IS - 2 SN - 0967-070X, 0967-070X KW - Economic conditions and policy - Economic policy, planning, and development KW - Transportation and transportation policy - Transportation KW - High speed rail Build-operate-transfer Taiwan Integration Transportation impact KW - Taiwan KW - Transportation KW - Planning KW - Economic development KW - High speed trains KW - article UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/58837979?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Apais&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transport+Policy&rft.atitle=High-speed+rail+in+Taiwan%3A+New+experience+and+issues+for+future+development&rft.au=Cheng%2C+Yung-Hsiang&rft.aulast=Cheng&rft.aufirst=Yung-Hsiang&rft.date=2010-03-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=51&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transport+Policy&rft.issn=0967070X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.tranpol.2009.10.009 LA - English DB - PAIS Index N1 - Date revised - 2010-04-07 N1 - Last updated - 2016-09-28 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - High speed trains; Taiwan; Economic development; Transportation; Planning DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2009.10.009 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 6 of 6] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756826918; 14189-100058_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 29-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from State Route (SR) 64 at Oakland City to US 50 in Washington is proposed. This final EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of the overall I-69 Evansville to Indianapolis project. Section 2 of the approved I-69 corridor is part of the expanding Oakland City/Washington urban development area and has experienced rapid population growth and structural development in recent years, placing stress on the existing transportation system. The project corridor has been divided into nine subsections for the presentation of alignment alternatives under consideration. The subsection break points occur at major natural barriers, such as major river crossings at the Patoka River and the East Fork of the White River, which are also county boundary lines, and at locations where alternatives overlap, allowing a transition from one alternative to the other. Alignment alternatives compared are: Alternative A, Alternative B, the Tier 2 draft EIS preferred alternative, and the Tier 2 refined preferred alternative. Thirteen conceptual interchange locations were considered initially, four locations being chosen after screening; these locations are SR 61/56, North Pike County, South Daviess County, and US 50. All impact data for alternatives consider the impacts of all four interchanges. The typical freeway cross-section would consist of two 12-foot lanes in each direction flanked by 11-foot outside and five-foot inside shoulders and separated by a 84-foot depressed median within an overall rights-of-way of 320 feet. In addition to the three alignment alternatives, this final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative. Estimated costs of the refined preferred alternative ranges from $426 million to $473 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the corridor study area. Economic performance in the area served by the freeway would be boosted NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for all segments would displace 65 residences, two businesses, and extensive land acreage, including 24 acres of wetlands, 210 acres of forest, and 1,113 acres of farmland. The project would require realignment of several miles of stream channel and encroach on floodplains. The project would have adverse noise and visual impacts on the Patoka Bridges Historic District. Rights-of-way development and motor vehicle use within the Corridor could significantly impact habitat for the Indiana bat and the bald eagle. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the revised draft EIS, see 09-0228D, Volume 33, Number 2. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0096D, Volume 33, Number 1. For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 02-0331D, and 03-0574F, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100058, Final EIS--1,179 pages, Appendices and Comments/Responses--CD-ROM, February 26, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Bridges KW - Economic Assessments KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Indiana KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826918?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-26&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 26, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 5 of 6] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756826619; 14189-100058_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 29-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from State Route (SR) 64 at Oakland City to US 50 in Washington is proposed. This final EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of the overall I-69 Evansville to Indianapolis project. Section 2 of the approved I-69 corridor is part of the expanding Oakland City/Washington urban development area and has experienced rapid population growth and structural development in recent years, placing stress on the existing transportation system. The project corridor has been divided into nine subsections for the presentation of alignment alternatives under consideration. The subsection break points occur at major natural barriers, such as major river crossings at the Patoka River and the East Fork of the White River, which are also county boundary lines, and at locations where alternatives overlap, allowing a transition from one alternative to the other. Alignment alternatives compared are: Alternative A, Alternative B, the Tier 2 draft EIS preferred alternative, and the Tier 2 refined preferred alternative. Thirteen conceptual interchange locations were considered initially, four locations being chosen after screening; these locations are SR 61/56, North Pike County, South Daviess County, and US 50. All impact data for alternatives consider the impacts of all four interchanges. The typical freeway cross-section would consist of two 12-foot lanes in each direction flanked by 11-foot outside and five-foot inside shoulders and separated by a 84-foot depressed median within an overall rights-of-way of 320 feet. In addition to the three alignment alternatives, this final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative. Estimated costs of the refined preferred alternative ranges from $426 million to $473 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the corridor study area. Economic performance in the area served by the freeway would be boosted NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for all segments would displace 65 residences, two businesses, and extensive land acreage, including 24 acres of wetlands, 210 acres of forest, and 1,113 acres of farmland. The project would require realignment of several miles of stream channel and encroach on floodplains. The project would have adverse noise and visual impacts on the Patoka Bridges Historic District. Rights-of-way development and motor vehicle use within the Corridor could significantly impact habitat for the Indiana bat and the bald eagle. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the revised draft EIS, see 09-0228D, Volume 33, Number 2. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0096D, Volume 33, Number 1. For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 02-0331D, and 03-0574F, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100058, Final EIS--1,179 pages, Appendices and Comments/Responses--CD-ROM, February 26, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Bridges KW - Economic Assessments KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Indiana KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826619?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-26&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 26, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 4 of 6] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756826609; 14189-100058_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 29-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from State Route (SR) 64 at Oakland City to US 50 in Washington is proposed. This final EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of the overall I-69 Evansville to Indianapolis project. Section 2 of the approved I-69 corridor is part of the expanding Oakland City/Washington urban development area and has experienced rapid population growth and structural development in recent years, placing stress on the existing transportation system. The project corridor has been divided into nine subsections for the presentation of alignment alternatives under consideration. The subsection break points occur at major natural barriers, such as major river crossings at the Patoka River and the East Fork of the White River, which are also county boundary lines, and at locations where alternatives overlap, allowing a transition from one alternative to the other. Alignment alternatives compared are: Alternative A, Alternative B, the Tier 2 draft EIS preferred alternative, and the Tier 2 refined preferred alternative. Thirteen conceptual interchange locations were considered initially, four locations being chosen after screening; these locations are SR 61/56, North Pike County, South Daviess County, and US 50. All impact data for alternatives consider the impacts of all four interchanges. The typical freeway cross-section would consist of two 12-foot lanes in each direction flanked by 11-foot outside and five-foot inside shoulders and separated by a 84-foot depressed median within an overall rights-of-way of 320 feet. In addition to the three alignment alternatives, this final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative. Estimated costs of the refined preferred alternative ranges from $426 million to $473 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the corridor study area. Economic performance in the area served by the freeway would be boosted NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for all segments would displace 65 residences, two businesses, and extensive land acreage, including 24 acres of wetlands, 210 acres of forest, and 1,113 acres of farmland. The project would require realignment of several miles of stream channel and encroach on floodplains. The project would have adverse noise and visual impacts on the Patoka Bridges Historic District. Rights-of-way development and motor vehicle use within the Corridor could significantly impact habitat for the Indiana bat and the bald eagle. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the revised draft EIS, see 09-0228D, Volume 33, Number 2. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0096D, Volume 33, Number 1. For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 02-0331D, and 03-0574F, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100058, Final EIS--1,179 pages, Appendices and Comments/Responses--CD-ROM, February 26, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Bridges KW - Economic Assessments KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Indiana KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826609?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-26&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 26, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 3 of 6] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756826598; 14189-100058_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 29-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from State Route (SR) 64 at Oakland City to US 50 in Washington is proposed. This final EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of the overall I-69 Evansville to Indianapolis project. Section 2 of the approved I-69 corridor is part of the expanding Oakland City/Washington urban development area and has experienced rapid population growth and structural development in recent years, placing stress on the existing transportation system. The project corridor has been divided into nine subsections for the presentation of alignment alternatives under consideration. The subsection break points occur at major natural barriers, such as major river crossings at the Patoka River and the East Fork of the White River, which are also county boundary lines, and at locations where alternatives overlap, allowing a transition from one alternative to the other. Alignment alternatives compared are: Alternative A, Alternative B, the Tier 2 draft EIS preferred alternative, and the Tier 2 refined preferred alternative. Thirteen conceptual interchange locations were considered initially, four locations being chosen after screening; these locations are SR 61/56, North Pike County, South Daviess County, and US 50. All impact data for alternatives consider the impacts of all four interchanges. The typical freeway cross-section would consist of two 12-foot lanes in each direction flanked by 11-foot outside and five-foot inside shoulders and separated by a 84-foot depressed median within an overall rights-of-way of 320 feet. In addition to the three alignment alternatives, this final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative. Estimated costs of the refined preferred alternative ranges from $426 million to $473 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the corridor study area. Economic performance in the area served by the freeway would be boosted NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for all segments would displace 65 residences, two businesses, and extensive land acreage, including 24 acres of wetlands, 210 acres of forest, and 1,113 acres of farmland. The project would require realignment of several miles of stream channel and encroach on floodplains. The project would have adverse noise and visual impacts on the Patoka Bridges Historic District. Rights-of-way development and motor vehicle use within the Corridor could significantly impact habitat for the Indiana bat and the bald eagle. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the revised draft EIS, see 09-0228D, Volume 33, Number 2. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0096D, Volume 33, Number 1. For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 02-0331D, and 03-0574F, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100058, Final EIS--1,179 pages, Appendices and Comments/Responses--CD-ROM, February 26, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Bridges KW - Economic Assessments KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Indiana KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826598?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-26&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 26, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 2 of 6] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756826586; 14189-100058_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 29-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from State Route (SR) 64 at Oakland City to US 50 in Washington is proposed. This final EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of the overall I-69 Evansville to Indianapolis project. Section 2 of the approved I-69 corridor is part of the expanding Oakland City/Washington urban development area and has experienced rapid population growth and structural development in recent years, placing stress on the existing transportation system. The project corridor has been divided into nine subsections for the presentation of alignment alternatives under consideration. The subsection break points occur at major natural barriers, such as major river crossings at the Patoka River and the East Fork of the White River, which are also county boundary lines, and at locations where alternatives overlap, allowing a transition from one alternative to the other. Alignment alternatives compared are: Alternative A, Alternative B, the Tier 2 draft EIS preferred alternative, and the Tier 2 refined preferred alternative. Thirteen conceptual interchange locations were considered initially, four locations being chosen after screening; these locations are SR 61/56, North Pike County, South Daviess County, and US 50. All impact data for alternatives consider the impacts of all four interchanges. The typical freeway cross-section would consist of two 12-foot lanes in each direction flanked by 11-foot outside and five-foot inside shoulders and separated by a 84-foot depressed median within an overall rights-of-way of 320 feet. In addition to the three alignment alternatives, this final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative. Estimated costs of the refined preferred alternative ranges from $426 million to $473 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the corridor study area. Economic performance in the area served by the freeway would be boosted NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for all segments would displace 65 residences, two businesses, and extensive land acreage, including 24 acres of wetlands, 210 acres of forest, and 1,113 acres of farmland. The project would require realignment of several miles of stream channel and encroach on floodplains. The project would have adverse noise and visual impacts on the Patoka Bridges Historic District. Rights-of-way development and motor vehicle use within the Corridor could significantly impact habitat for the Indiana bat and the bald eagle. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the revised draft EIS, see 09-0228D, Volume 33, Number 2. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0096D, Volume 33, Number 1. For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 02-0331D, and 03-0574F, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100058, Final EIS--1,179 pages, Appendices and Comments/Responses--CD-ROM, February 26, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Bridges KW - Economic Assessments KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Indiana KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826586?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-26&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 26, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 1 of 6] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 756826576; 14189-100058_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 29-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from State Route (SR) 64 at Oakland City to US 50 in Washington is proposed. This final EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of the overall I-69 Evansville to Indianapolis project. Section 2 of the approved I-69 corridor is part of the expanding Oakland City/Washington urban development area and has experienced rapid population growth and structural development in recent years, placing stress on the existing transportation system. The project corridor has been divided into nine subsections for the presentation of alignment alternatives under consideration. The subsection break points occur at major natural barriers, such as major river crossings at the Patoka River and the East Fork of the White River, which are also county boundary lines, and at locations where alternatives overlap, allowing a transition from one alternative to the other. Alignment alternatives compared are: Alternative A, Alternative B, the Tier 2 draft EIS preferred alternative, and the Tier 2 refined preferred alternative. Thirteen conceptual interchange locations were considered initially, four locations being chosen after screening; these locations are SR 61/56, North Pike County, South Daviess County, and US 50. All impact data for alternatives consider the impacts of all four interchanges. The typical freeway cross-section would consist of two 12-foot lanes in each direction flanked by 11-foot outside and five-foot inside shoulders and separated by a 84-foot depressed median within an overall rights-of-way of 320 feet. In addition to the three alignment alternatives, this final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative. Estimated costs of the refined preferred alternative ranges from $426 million to $473 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the corridor study area. Economic performance in the area served by the freeway would be boosted NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for all segments would displace 65 residences, two businesses, and extensive land acreage, including 24 acres of wetlands, 210 acres of forest, and 1,113 acres of farmland. The project would require realignment of several miles of stream channel and encroach on floodplains. The project would have adverse noise and visual impacts on the Patoka Bridges Historic District. Rights-of-way development and motor vehicle use within the Corridor could significantly impact habitat for the Indiana bat and the bald eagle. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the revised draft EIS, see 09-0228D, Volume 33, Number 2. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0096D, Volume 33, Number 1. For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 02-0331D, and 03-0574F, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100058, Final EIS--1,179 pages, Appendices and Comments/Responses--CD-ROM, February 26, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Bridges KW - Economic Assessments KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Indiana KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826576?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-26&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 26, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA PROJECT; SECTION 2, OAKLAND CITY TO WASHINGTON, INDIANA (TIER 2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 754908179; 14189 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 29-mile section of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana from State Route (SR) 64 at Oakland City to US 50 in Washington is proposed. This final EIS tiers off a December 2003 final EIS on the construction of the overall I-69 Evansville to Indianapolis project. Section 2 of the approved I-69 corridor is part of the expanding Oakland City/Washington urban development area and has experienced rapid population growth and structural development in recent years, placing stress on the existing transportation system. The project corridor has been divided into nine subsections for the presentation of alignment alternatives under consideration. The subsection break points occur at major natural barriers, such as major river crossings at the Patoka River and the East Fork of the White River, which are also county boundary lines, and at locations where alternatives overlap, allowing a transition from one alternative to the other. Alignment alternatives compared are: Alternative A, Alternative B, the Tier 2 draft EIS preferred alternative, and the Tier 2 refined preferred alternative. Thirteen conceptual interchange locations were considered initially, four locations being chosen after screening; these locations are SR 61/56, North Pike County, South Daviess County, and US 50. All impact data for alternatives consider the impacts of all four interchanges. The typical freeway cross-section would consist of two 12-foot lanes in each direction flanked by 11-foot outside and five-foot inside shoulders and separated by a 84-foot depressed median within an overall rights-of-way of 320 feet. In addition to the three alignment alternatives, this final EIS considers a No-Build Alternative. Estimated costs of the refined preferred alternative ranges from $426 million to $473 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the corridor study area. Economic performance in the area served by the freeway would be boosted NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for all segments would displace 65 residences, two businesses, and extensive land acreage, including 24 acres of wetlands, 210 acres of forest, and 1,113 acres of farmland. The project would require realignment of several miles of stream channel and encroach on floodplains. The project would have adverse noise and visual impacts on the Patoka Bridges Historic District. Rights-of-way development and motor vehicle use within the Corridor could significantly impact habitat for the Indiana bat and the bald eagle. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the revised draft EIS, see 09-0228D, Volume 33, Number 2. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0096D, Volume 33, Number 1. For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs, see 02-0331D, and 03-0574F, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100058, Final EIS--1,179 pages, Appendices and Comments/Responses--CD-ROM, February 26, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-IN-EIS-10-01-F KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Bridges KW - Economic Assessments KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Indiana KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Districts KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908179?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-26&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS%2C+INDIANA+PROJECT%3B+SECTION+2%2C+OAKLAND+CITY+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+INDIANA+%28TIER+2+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 26, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2012-2016. [Part 2 of 3] T2 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2012-2016. AN - 873130300; 14188-7_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards for the total fleet of passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles built in model years (MY) 2012-2016 are proposed. A joint rulemaking by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would address the challenges of energy independence and security and global warming through rules calling for a strong and coordinated federal greenhouse gas and fuel economy program referred to as the National Program. The rules would require vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile in MY 2016 under EPA's GHG program, and 34.1 mpg in MY 2016 under NHTSA's CAFE program. Nine alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this final EIS. The No Action Alternative assumes that average fuel economy levels in the absence of CAFE standards beyond MY 2011 would equal the higher of the agencies collective market forecast or the manufacturers required level of average fuel economy for MY 2011. Eight action alternatives are proposed, including NHTSAs preferred alternative (Alternative 4) which would require a 4.3-percent average annual increase in mpg from 2012 to 2016. This alternative and the EPA proposed rulemaking together comprise the National Program. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8 would require average annual increases in mpg ranging from 3 percent to 7 percent from 2012 to 2016. Because the proposed percentage increases in stringency are average increases, they could be constant throughout the period or could vary from year to year. Alternative 6 would maximize net benefits (MNB) and Alternative 9 would equalize total cost and total benefits (TCTB). The preferred alternative represents the required fuel economy level that NHTSA has tentatively determined to be the maximum feasible under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, based on balancing statutory and other relevant considerations. The MNB and TCTB alternatives represent fuel economy levels that depend on the agencys best estimate of relevant economic variables (e.g., gasoline prices, social cost of carbon, the discount rate, and rebound effect) and provide useful information about where the standards would be set if costs and benefits were balanced in two different ways. The 6-percent Alternative would result in required mpg in 2016 that is slightly higher than required mpg under the MNB Alternative, but required mpg in 2012 through 2015 under the 6-percent Alternative would be slightly lower than under the MNB Alternative. The net result is that there is little substantive difference in required mpg under the 6-percent and MNB Alternatives. The TCTB Alternative would result in required mpg in 2016 that is just slightly lower than required mpg under the 7-percent Alternative, but required mpg in 2012 through 2015 under the TCTB Alternative would be slightly higher than under the 7-percent Alternative. The net result is that there is little substantive difference in required mpg under the 7-percent and TCTB Alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed rules would address the urgent challenges of energy independence and security and global warming by achieving substantial improvements in fuel economy and reductions of GHG emissions from the light-duty vehicle part of the transportation sector based on technology that is already being commercially applied and that can be incorporated at a reasonable cost. Consistent, harmonized, and streamlined requirements under the National Program would deliver environmental and energy benefits, cost savings, and administrative efficiencies on a nationwide basis that might not be available under a less coordinated approach. The proposed National Program would make it possible for the standards of two different federal agencies and the standards of California and other states to act in a unified fashion and would help to mitigate the cost to manufacturers of having to comply with multiple sets of federal and state standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The implementation of fuel economy standards would not directly regulate emissions from passenger cars and light trucks. Under all the alternatives analyzed, growth in the number of passenger cars and light trucks in use throughout the country, combined with assumed increases in their average use, would result in an overall level of growth that overwhelms improvements in fuel economy. The proposed alternatives would not prevent climate change, but would only result in reductions in the anticipated increases in carbon dioxide concentrations, temperature, precipitation, and sea level. LEGAL MANDATES: Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (49 U.S.C. 32091 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0398D, Volume 33, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100057, Final EIS--660 pages; Appendices--CD-ROM, February 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Manufacturing KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Air Quality Standards KW - Climatologic Assessments KW - Emissions KW - Emission Standards KW - Energy Consumption KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Regulations KW - NONE KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, Project Authorization KW - Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130300?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2012-2016.&rft.title=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2012-2016.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2012-2016. [Part 3 of 3] T2 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2012-2016. AN - 873130086; 14188-7_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards for the total fleet of passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles built in model years (MY) 2012-2016 are proposed. A joint rulemaking by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would address the challenges of energy independence and security and global warming through rules calling for a strong and coordinated federal greenhouse gas and fuel economy program referred to as the National Program. The rules would require vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile in MY 2016 under EPA's GHG program, and 34.1 mpg in MY 2016 under NHTSA's CAFE program. Nine alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this final EIS. The No Action Alternative assumes that average fuel economy levels in the absence of CAFE standards beyond MY 2011 would equal the higher of the agencies collective market forecast or the manufacturers required level of average fuel economy for MY 2011. Eight action alternatives are proposed, including NHTSAs preferred alternative (Alternative 4) which would require a 4.3-percent average annual increase in mpg from 2012 to 2016. This alternative and the EPA proposed rulemaking together comprise the National Program. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8 would require average annual increases in mpg ranging from 3 percent to 7 percent from 2012 to 2016. Because the proposed percentage increases in stringency are average increases, they could be constant throughout the period or could vary from year to year. Alternative 6 would maximize net benefits (MNB) and Alternative 9 would equalize total cost and total benefits (TCTB). The preferred alternative represents the required fuel economy level that NHTSA has tentatively determined to be the maximum feasible under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, based on balancing statutory and other relevant considerations. The MNB and TCTB alternatives represent fuel economy levels that depend on the agencys best estimate of relevant economic variables (e.g., gasoline prices, social cost of carbon, the discount rate, and rebound effect) and provide useful information about where the standards would be set if costs and benefits were balanced in two different ways. The 6-percent Alternative would result in required mpg in 2016 that is slightly higher than required mpg under the MNB Alternative, but required mpg in 2012 through 2015 under the 6-percent Alternative would be slightly lower than under the MNB Alternative. The net result is that there is little substantive difference in required mpg under the 6-percent and MNB Alternatives. The TCTB Alternative would result in required mpg in 2016 that is just slightly lower than required mpg under the 7-percent Alternative, but required mpg in 2012 through 2015 under the TCTB Alternative would be slightly higher than under the 7-percent Alternative. The net result is that there is little substantive difference in required mpg under the 7-percent and TCTB Alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed rules would address the urgent challenges of energy independence and security and global warming by achieving substantial improvements in fuel economy and reductions of GHG emissions from the light-duty vehicle part of the transportation sector based on technology that is already being commercially applied and that can be incorporated at a reasonable cost. Consistent, harmonized, and streamlined requirements under the National Program would deliver environmental and energy benefits, cost savings, and administrative efficiencies on a nationwide basis that might not be available under a less coordinated approach. The proposed National Program would make it possible for the standards of two different federal agencies and the standards of California and other states to act in a unified fashion and would help to mitigate the cost to manufacturers of having to comply with multiple sets of federal and state standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The implementation of fuel economy standards would not directly regulate emissions from passenger cars and light trucks. Under all the alternatives analyzed, growth in the number of passenger cars and light trucks in use throughout the country, combined with assumed increases in their average use, would result in an overall level of growth that overwhelms improvements in fuel economy. The proposed alternatives would not prevent climate change, but would only result in reductions in the anticipated increases in carbon dioxide concentrations, temperature, precipitation, and sea level. LEGAL MANDATES: Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (49 U.S.C. 32091 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0398D, Volume 33, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100057, Final EIS--660 pages; Appendices--CD-ROM, February 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Manufacturing KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Air Quality Standards KW - Climatologic Assessments KW - Emissions KW - Emission Standards KW - Energy Consumption KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Regulations KW - NONE KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, Project Authorization KW - Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130086?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2012-2016.&rft.title=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2012-2016.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2012-2016. [Part 1 of 3] T2 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2012-2016. AN - 873127152; 14188-7_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards for the total fleet of passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles built in model years (MY) 2012-2016 are proposed. A joint rulemaking by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would address the challenges of energy independence and security and global warming through rules calling for a strong and coordinated federal greenhouse gas and fuel economy program referred to as the National Program. The rules would require vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile in MY 2016 under EPA's GHG program, and 34.1 mpg in MY 2016 under NHTSA's CAFE program. Nine alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this final EIS. The No Action Alternative assumes that average fuel economy levels in the absence of CAFE standards beyond MY 2011 would equal the higher of the agencies collective market forecast or the manufacturers required level of average fuel economy for MY 2011. Eight action alternatives are proposed, including NHTSAs preferred alternative (Alternative 4) which would require a 4.3-percent average annual increase in mpg from 2012 to 2016. This alternative and the EPA proposed rulemaking together comprise the National Program. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8 would require average annual increases in mpg ranging from 3 percent to 7 percent from 2012 to 2016. Because the proposed percentage increases in stringency are average increases, they could be constant throughout the period or could vary from year to year. Alternative 6 would maximize net benefits (MNB) and Alternative 9 would equalize total cost and total benefits (TCTB). The preferred alternative represents the required fuel economy level that NHTSA has tentatively determined to be the maximum feasible under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, based on balancing statutory and other relevant considerations. The MNB and TCTB alternatives represent fuel economy levels that depend on the agencys best estimate of relevant economic variables (e.g., gasoline prices, social cost of carbon, the discount rate, and rebound effect) and provide useful information about where the standards would be set if costs and benefits were balanced in two different ways. The 6-percent Alternative would result in required mpg in 2016 that is slightly higher than required mpg under the MNB Alternative, but required mpg in 2012 through 2015 under the 6-percent Alternative would be slightly lower than under the MNB Alternative. The net result is that there is little substantive difference in required mpg under the 6-percent and MNB Alternatives. The TCTB Alternative would result in required mpg in 2016 that is just slightly lower than required mpg under the 7-percent Alternative, but required mpg in 2012 through 2015 under the TCTB Alternative would be slightly higher than under the 7-percent Alternative. The net result is that there is little substantive difference in required mpg under the 7-percent and TCTB Alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed rules would address the urgent challenges of energy independence and security and global warming by achieving substantial improvements in fuel economy and reductions of GHG emissions from the light-duty vehicle part of the transportation sector based on technology that is already being commercially applied and that can be incorporated at a reasonable cost. Consistent, harmonized, and streamlined requirements under the National Program would deliver environmental and energy benefits, cost savings, and administrative efficiencies on a nationwide basis that might not be available under a less coordinated approach. The proposed National Program would make it possible for the standards of two different federal agencies and the standards of California and other states to act in a unified fashion and would help to mitigate the cost to manufacturers of having to comply with multiple sets of federal and state standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The implementation of fuel economy standards would not directly regulate emissions from passenger cars and light trucks. Under all the alternatives analyzed, growth in the number of passenger cars and light trucks in use throughout the country, combined with assumed increases in their average use, would result in an overall level of growth that overwhelms improvements in fuel economy. The proposed alternatives would not prevent climate change, but would only result in reductions in the anticipated increases in carbon dioxide concentrations, temperature, precipitation, and sea level. LEGAL MANDATES: Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (49 U.S.C. 32091 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0398D, Volume 33, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100057, Final EIS--660 pages; Appendices--CD-ROM, February 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Manufacturing KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Air Quality Standards KW - Climatologic Assessments KW - Emissions KW - Emission Standards KW - Energy Consumption KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Regulations KW - NONE KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, Project Authorization KW - Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127152?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2012-2016.&rft.title=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2012-2016.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2012-2016. AN - 16379296; 14188 AB - PURPOSE: Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards for the total fleet of passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles built in model years (MY) 2012-2016 are proposed. A joint rulemaking by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would address the challenges of energy independence and security and global warming through rules calling for a strong and coordinated federal greenhouse gas and fuel economy program referred to as the National Program. The rules would require vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile in MY 2016 under EPA's GHG program, and 34.1 mpg in MY 2016 under NHTSA's CAFE program. Nine alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this final EIS. The No Action Alternative assumes that average fuel economy levels in the absence of CAFE standards beyond MY 2011 would equal the higher of the agencies collective market forecast or the manufacturers required level of average fuel economy for MY 2011. Eight action alternatives are proposed, including NHTSAs preferred alternative (Alternative 4) which would require a 4.3-percent average annual increase in mpg from 2012 to 2016. This alternative and the EPA proposed rulemaking together comprise the National Program. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8 would require average annual increases in mpg ranging from 3 percent to 7 percent from 2012 to 2016. Because the proposed percentage increases in stringency are average increases, they could be constant throughout the period or could vary from year to year. Alternative 6 would maximize net benefits (MNB) and Alternative 9 would equalize total cost and total benefits (TCTB). The preferred alternative represents the required fuel economy level that NHTSA has tentatively determined to be the maximum feasible under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, based on balancing statutory and other relevant considerations. The MNB and TCTB alternatives represent fuel economy levels that depend on the agencys best estimate of relevant economic variables (e.g., gasoline prices, social cost of carbon, the discount rate, and rebound effect) and provide useful information about where the standards would be set if costs and benefits were balanced in two different ways. The 6-percent Alternative would result in required mpg in 2016 that is slightly higher than required mpg under the MNB Alternative, but required mpg in 2012 through 2015 under the 6-percent Alternative would be slightly lower than under the MNB Alternative. The net result is that there is little substantive difference in required mpg under the 6-percent and MNB Alternatives. The TCTB Alternative would result in required mpg in 2016 that is just slightly lower than required mpg under the 7-percent Alternative, but required mpg in 2012 through 2015 under the TCTB Alternative would be slightly higher than under the 7-percent Alternative. The net result is that there is little substantive difference in required mpg under the 7-percent and TCTB Alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed rules would address the urgent challenges of energy independence and security and global warming by achieving substantial improvements in fuel economy and reductions of GHG emissions from the light-duty vehicle part of the transportation sector based on technology that is already being commercially applied and that can be incorporated at a reasonable cost. Consistent, harmonized, and streamlined requirements under the National Program would deliver environmental and energy benefits, cost savings, and administrative efficiencies on a nationwide basis that might not be available under a less coordinated approach. The proposed National Program would make it possible for the standards of two different federal agencies and the standards of California and other states to act in a unified fashion and would help to mitigate the cost to manufacturers of having to comply with multiple sets of federal and state standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The implementation of fuel economy standards would not directly regulate emissions from passenger cars and light trucks. Under all the alternatives analyzed, growth in the number of passenger cars and light trucks in use throughout the country, combined with assumed increases in their average use, would result in an overall level of growth that overwhelms improvements in fuel economy. The proposed alternatives would not prevent climate change, but would only result in reductions in the anticipated increases in carbon dioxide concentrations, temperature, precipitation, and sea level. LEGAL MANDATES: Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (49 U.S.C. 32091 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0398D, Volume 33, Number 04. JF - EPA number: 100057, Final EIS--660 pages; Appendices--CD-ROM, February 23, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Manufacturing KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Air Quality Standards KW - Climatologic Assessments KW - Emissions KW - Emission Standards KW - Energy Consumption KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Regulations KW - NONE KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, Project Authorization KW - Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16379296?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2012-2016.&rft.title=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2012-2016.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. [Part 2 of 5] T2 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. AN - 756826965; 14179-100048_0002 AB - PURPOSE: A new alternative alignment for the proposed improvement of Section I of Saddle Road, which extends from Mamalahoa Highway (State Route (SR) 190) near milepost 53 to milepost 41, making up the western end of Saddle Road near Hilo, Hawaii, is proposed. Saddle Road extends between mileposts 6 and 53. Sections II and III of Saddle Road, between mileposts 8.5 and 41, have already been completed or are advancing towards completion along the alignments identified in the 1999 final EIS for the entire project. Section IV is currently in final design, leaving Section I as the last piece planned for construction. In 2006, the U.S. Army purchased for military training a property known as the Keamuku parcel. The alignment selected for Section I of the improved Saddle Road in the 1999 Record of Decision, termed W-3, essentially divides the Keamuku parcel in half. In order to provide a safe separation of civilian transportation and military training, the Army requested another alternative alignment near the southern boundary of Keamuku for the realignment of this section of Saddle Road. In Section I, the existing Saddle Road is a narrow, winding, two-lane road with steep grades, sharp curves, poor pavement, substandard drainage, and no shoulders. Saddle Road is an important cross-island link for business travel, the transport of goods and services, tourism, recreation, shopping, and commuting, and is the only paved arterial serving the army training facility, the astronomical observatory on Mauna Kea, Waiki'i Ranch, upper Kaumana, Mauna Kea State Recreation Area, Kilohana Girl Scout Camp, and major hunting areas. Saddle Roads accident rate of 5.43 accidents per million vehicle miles in 1996 was significantly higher than the average rate for rural two-lane highways throughout the State of Hawaii and roadway deficiencies also hindered the timely response of emergency vehicles responding to fires, accidents, and other emergencies. Issues of concern include the effects on protected species of flora and fauna, critical habitat for endangered palila, wetlands and biological habitats of importance, archaeological resources, fire hazard, residential displacement, and noise. The proposed new 10.3-mile alignment, termed W-7, would traverse the Keamuku parcel in a westerly direction, roughly paralleling the southern boundary of Keamuku until near Mamalahoa Highway, where it would veer slightly north. W-7 would have a maximum grade of 8.0 percent and an average grade of about 6.0 percent. About 250 acres of right-of-way would be required. Mamalahoa Highway would be crossed at-grade or by a grade-separated structure. Construction would occur over about two years and cost $58 million in 2007 dollars. The No Action Alternative was already rejected and is referenced for baseline purposes only. If it is not feasible to construct the preferred alternative, alignment W-7, it is expected that the W-3 alignment would be constructed. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The realigned highway would reduce conflicts and hazards with military operations, improve pavement conditions, increase safety and capacity, improve quality of traffic flow, decrease cross-island travel times by approximately 30 minutes, and stimulate economic growth and development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed improvement of the road could increase the likelihood of wildfire. After construction, there would be a permanently heightened risk of wildfire ignition due to the substantial increase in the number of vehicles traversing the area. Construction of the proposed highway would generate a corridor along which introduced species, both plant and animal, would be able more readily to gain access to native habitat and would result in a change in visual character due to the introduction of a paved road to the existing pastoral setting. The proposed alignment would take 3,200 square feet of the Old Waimea-Kona Belt Road which is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and final EISs, see 97-0451D, Volume 21, Number 6 and 99-0397F, Volume 23, Number 4, respectively. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 09-0442D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100048, Final supplemental EIS--336 pages and maps, Appendices--908 pages and maps, February 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-HI-SEIS-10-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Fire Prevention KW - Fires KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Roads KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Army Garrison, Hawaii KW - Hawaii KW - Pohakuloa Training Area, Hawaii UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826965?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SADDLE+ROAD+%28STATE+ROUTE+200%29%2C+MAMALAHOA+HIGHWAY+%28STATE+ROUTE+190%29+TO+MILEPOST+41+%28FHWA+PROJECT+NUMBER+200%2800%29%29%2C+HAWAII+COUNTY%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=SADDLE+ROAD+%28STATE+ROUTE+200%29%2C+MAMALAHOA+HIGHWAY+%28STATE+ROUTE+190%29+TO+MILEPOST+41+%28FHWA+PROJECT+NUMBER+200%2800%29%29%2C+HAWAII+COUNTY%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. [Part 3 of 5] T2 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. AN - 756826625; 14179-100048_0003 AB - PURPOSE: A new alternative alignment for the proposed improvement of Section I of Saddle Road, which extends from Mamalahoa Highway (State Route (SR) 190) near milepost 53 to milepost 41, making up the western end of Saddle Road near Hilo, Hawaii, is proposed. Saddle Road extends between mileposts 6 and 53. Sections II and III of Saddle Road, between mileposts 8.5 and 41, have already been completed or are advancing towards completion along the alignments identified in the 1999 final EIS for the entire project. Section IV is currently in final design, leaving Section I as the last piece planned for construction. In 2006, the U.S. Army purchased for military training a property known as the Keamuku parcel. The alignment selected for Section I of the improved Saddle Road in the 1999 Record of Decision, termed W-3, essentially divides the Keamuku parcel in half. In order to provide a safe separation of civilian transportation and military training, the Army requested another alternative alignment near the southern boundary of Keamuku for the realignment of this section of Saddle Road. In Section I, the existing Saddle Road is a narrow, winding, two-lane road with steep grades, sharp curves, poor pavement, substandard drainage, and no shoulders. Saddle Road is an important cross-island link for business travel, the transport of goods and services, tourism, recreation, shopping, and commuting, and is the only paved arterial serving the army training facility, the astronomical observatory on Mauna Kea, Waiki'i Ranch, upper Kaumana, Mauna Kea State Recreation Area, Kilohana Girl Scout Camp, and major hunting areas. Saddle Roads accident rate of 5.43 accidents per million vehicle miles in 1996 was significantly higher than the average rate for rural two-lane highways throughout the State of Hawaii and roadway deficiencies also hindered the timely response of emergency vehicles responding to fires, accidents, and other emergencies. Issues of concern include the effects on protected species of flora and fauna, critical habitat for endangered palila, wetlands and biological habitats of importance, archaeological resources, fire hazard, residential displacement, and noise. The proposed new 10.3-mile alignment, termed W-7, would traverse the Keamuku parcel in a westerly direction, roughly paralleling the southern boundary of Keamuku until near Mamalahoa Highway, where it would veer slightly north. W-7 would have a maximum grade of 8.0 percent and an average grade of about 6.0 percent. About 250 acres of right-of-way would be required. Mamalahoa Highway would be crossed at-grade or by a grade-separated structure. Construction would occur over about two years and cost $58 million in 2007 dollars. The No Action Alternative was already rejected and is referenced for baseline purposes only. If it is not feasible to construct the preferred alternative, alignment W-7, it is expected that the W-3 alignment would be constructed. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The realigned highway would reduce conflicts and hazards with military operations, improve pavement conditions, increase safety and capacity, improve quality of traffic flow, decrease cross-island travel times by approximately 30 minutes, and stimulate economic growth and development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed improvement of the road could increase the likelihood of wildfire. After construction, there would be a permanently heightened risk of wildfire ignition due to the substantial increase in the number of vehicles traversing the area. Construction of the proposed highway would generate a corridor along which introduced species, both plant and animal, would be able more readily to gain access to native habitat and would result in a change in visual character due to the introduction of a paved road to the existing pastoral setting. The proposed alignment would take 3,200 square feet of the Old Waimea-Kona Belt Road which is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and final EISs, see 97-0451D, Volume 21, Number 6 and 99-0397F, Volume 23, Number 4, respectively. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 09-0442D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100048, Final supplemental EIS--336 pages and maps, Appendices--908 pages and maps, February 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-HI-SEIS-10-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Fire Prevention KW - Fires KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Roads KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Army Garrison, Hawaii KW - Hawaii KW - Pohakuloa Training Area, Hawaii UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826625?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SADDLE+ROAD+%28STATE+ROUTE+200%29%2C+MAMALAHOA+HIGHWAY+%28STATE+ROUTE+190%29+TO+MILEPOST+41+%28FHWA+PROJECT+NUMBER+200%2800%29%29%2C+HAWAII+COUNTY%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=SADDLE+ROAD+%28STATE+ROUTE+200%29%2C+MAMALAHOA+HIGHWAY+%28STATE+ROUTE+190%29+TO+MILEPOST+41+%28FHWA+PROJECT+NUMBER+200%2800%29%29%2C+HAWAII+COUNTY%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. [Part 4 of 5] T2 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. AN - 756826579; 14179-100048_0004 AB - PURPOSE: A new alternative alignment for the proposed improvement of Section I of Saddle Road, which extends from Mamalahoa Highway (State Route (SR) 190) near milepost 53 to milepost 41, making up the western end of Saddle Road near Hilo, Hawaii, is proposed. Saddle Road extends between mileposts 6 and 53. Sections II and III of Saddle Road, between mileposts 8.5 and 41, have already been completed or are advancing towards completion along the alignments identified in the 1999 final EIS for the entire project. Section IV is currently in final design, leaving Section I as the last piece planned for construction. In 2006, the U.S. Army purchased for military training a property known as the Keamuku parcel. The alignment selected for Section I of the improved Saddle Road in the 1999 Record of Decision, termed W-3, essentially divides the Keamuku parcel in half. In order to provide a safe separation of civilian transportation and military training, the Army requested another alternative alignment near the southern boundary of Keamuku for the realignment of this section of Saddle Road. In Section I, the existing Saddle Road is a narrow, winding, two-lane road with steep grades, sharp curves, poor pavement, substandard drainage, and no shoulders. Saddle Road is an important cross-island link for business travel, the transport of goods and services, tourism, recreation, shopping, and commuting, and is the only paved arterial serving the army training facility, the astronomical observatory on Mauna Kea, Waiki'i Ranch, upper Kaumana, Mauna Kea State Recreation Area, Kilohana Girl Scout Camp, and major hunting areas. Saddle Roads accident rate of 5.43 accidents per million vehicle miles in 1996 was significantly higher than the average rate for rural two-lane highways throughout the State of Hawaii and roadway deficiencies also hindered the timely response of emergency vehicles responding to fires, accidents, and other emergencies. Issues of concern include the effects on protected species of flora and fauna, critical habitat for endangered palila, wetlands and biological habitats of importance, archaeological resources, fire hazard, residential displacement, and noise. The proposed new 10.3-mile alignment, termed W-7, would traverse the Keamuku parcel in a westerly direction, roughly paralleling the southern boundary of Keamuku until near Mamalahoa Highway, where it would veer slightly north. W-7 would have a maximum grade of 8.0 percent and an average grade of about 6.0 percent. About 250 acres of right-of-way would be required. Mamalahoa Highway would be crossed at-grade or by a grade-separated structure. Construction would occur over about two years and cost $58 million in 2007 dollars. The No Action Alternative was already rejected and is referenced for baseline purposes only. If it is not feasible to construct the preferred alternative, alignment W-7, it is expected that the W-3 alignment would be constructed. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The realigned highway would reduce conflicts and hazards with military operations, improve pavement conditions, increase safety and capacity, improve quality of traffic flow, decrease cross-island travel times by approximately 30 minutes, and stimulate economic growth and development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed improvement of the road could increase the likelihood of wildfire. After construction, there would be a permanently heightened risk of wildfire ignition due to the substantial increase in the number of vehicles traversing the area. Construction of the proposed highway would generate a corridor along which introduced species, both plant and animal, would be able more readily to gain access to native habitat and would result in a change in visual character due to the introduction of a paved road to the existing pastoral setting. The proposed alignment would take 3,200 square feet of the Old Waimea-Kona Belt Road which is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and final EISs, see 97-0451D, Volume 21, Number 6 and 99-0397F, Volume 23, Number 4, respectively. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 09-0442D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100048, Final supplemental EIS--336 pages and maps, Appendices--908 pages and maps, February 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-HI-SEIS-10-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Fire Prevention KW - Fires KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Roads KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Army Garrison, Hawaii KW - Hawaii KW - Pohakuloa Training Area, Hawaii UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826579?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SADDLE+ROAD+%28STATE+ROUTE+200%29%2C+MAMALAHOA+HIGHWAY+%28STATE+ROUTE+190%29+TO+MILEPOST+41+%28FHWA+PROJECT+NUMBER+200%2800%29%29%2C+HAWAII+COUNTY%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=SADDLE+ROAD+%28STATE+ROUTE+200%29%2C+MAMALAHOA+HIGHWAY+%28STATE+ROUTE+190%29+TO+MILEPOST+41+%28FHWA+PROJECT+NUMBER+200%2800%29%29%2C+HAWAII+COUNTY%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. [Part 5 of 5] T2 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. AN - 756826500; 14179-100048_0005 AB - PURPOSE: A new alternative alignment for the proposed improvement of Section I of Saddle Road, which extends from Mamalahoa Highway (State Route (SR) 190) near milepost 53 to milepost 41, making up the western end of Saddle Road near Hilo, Hawaii, is proposed. Saddle Road extends between mileposts 6 and 53. Sections II and III of Saddle Road, between mileposts 8.5 and 41, have already been completed or are advancing towards completion along the alignments identified in the 1999 final EIS for the entire project. Section IV is currently in final design, leaving Section I as the last piece planned for construction. In 2006, the U.S. Army purchased for military training a property known as the Keamuku parcel. The alignment selected for Section I of the improved Saddle Road in the 1999 Record of Decision, termed W-3, essentially divides the Keamuku parcel in half. In order to provide a safe separation of civilian transportation and military training, the Army requested another alternative alignment near the southern boundary of Keamuku for the realignment of this section of Saddle Road. In Section I, the existing Saddle Road is a narrow, winding, two-lane road with steep grades, sharp curves, poor pavement, substandard drainage, and no shoulders. Saddle Road is an important cross-island link for business travel, the transport of goods and services, tourism, recreation, shopping, and commuting, and is the only paved arterial serving the army training facility, the astronomical observatory on Mauna Kea, Waiki'i Ranch, upper Kaumana, Mauna Kea State Recreation Area, Kilohana Girl Scout Camp, and major hunting areas. Saddle Roads accident rate of 5.43 accidents per million vehicle miles in 1996 was significantly higher than the average rate for rural two-lane highways throughout the State of Hawaii and roadway deficiencies also hindered the timely response of emergency vehicles responding to fires, accidents, and other emergencies. Issues of concern include the effects on protected species of flora and fauna, critical habitat for endangered palila, wetlands and biological habitats of importance, archaeological resources, fire hazard, residential displacement, and noise. The proposed new 10.3-mile alignment, termed W-7, would traverse the Keamuku parcel in a westerly direction, roughly paralleling the southern boundary of Keamuku until near Mamalahoa Highway, where it would veer slightly north. W-7 would have a maximum grade of 8.0 percent and an average grade of about 6.0 percent. About 250 acres of right-of-way would be required. Mamalahoa Highway would be crossed at-grade or by a grade-separated structure. Construction would occur over about two years and cost $58 million in 2007 dollars. The No Action Alternative was already rejected and is referenced for baseline purposes only. If it is not feasible to construct the preferred alternative, alignment W-7, it is expected that the W-3 alignment would be constructed. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The realigned highway would reduce conflicts and hazards with military operations, improve pavement conditions, increase safety and capacity, improve quality of traffic flow, decrease cross-island travel times by approximately 30 minutes, and stimulate economic growth and development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed improvement of the road could increase the likelihood of wildfire. After construction, there would be a permanently heightened risk of wildfire ignition due to the substantial increase in the number of vehicles traversing the area. Construction of the proposed highway would generate a corridor along which introduced species, both plant and animal, would be able more readily to gain access to native habitat and would result in a change in visual character due to the introduction of a paved road to the existing pastoral setting. The proposed alignment would take 3,200 square feet of the Old Waimea-Kona Belt Road which is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and final EISs, see 97-0451D, Volume 21, Number 6 and 99-0397F, Volume 23, Number 4, respectively. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 09-0442D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100048, Final supplemental EIS--336 pages and maps, Appendices--908 pages and maps, February 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-HI-SEIS-10-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Fire Prevention KW - Fires KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Roads KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Army Garrison, Hawaii KW - Hawaii KW - Pohakuloa Training Area, Hawaii UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826500?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SADDLE+ROAD+%28STATE+ROUTE+200%29%2C+MAMALAHOA+HIGHWAY+%28STATE+ROUTE+190%29+TO+MILEPOST+41+%28FHWA+PROJECT+NUMBER+200%2800%29%29%2C+HAWAII+COUNTY%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=SADDLE+ROAD+%28STATE+ROUTE+200%29%2C+MAMALAHOA+HIGHWAY+%28STATE+ROUTE+190%29+TO+MILEPOST+41+%28FHWA+PROJECT+NUMBER+200%2800%29%29%2C+HAWAII+COUNTY%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. [Part 1 of 5] T2 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. AN - 756826471; 14179-100048_0001 AB - PURPOSE: A new alternative alignment for the proposed improvement of Section I of Saddle Road, which extends from Mamalahoa Highway (State Route (SR) 190) near milepost 53 to milepost 41, making up the western end of Saddle Road near Hilo, Hawaii, is proposed. Saddle Road extends between mileposts 6 and 53. Sections II and III of Saddle Road, between mileposts 8.5 and 41, have already been completed or are advancing towards completion along the alignments identified in the 1999 final EIS for the entire project. Section IV is currently in final design, leaving Section I as the last piece planned for construction. In 2006, the U.S. Army purchased for military training a property known as the Keamuku parcel. The alignment selected for Section I of the improved Saddle Road in the 1999 Record of Decision, termed W-3, essentially divides the Keamuku parcel in half. In order to provide a safe separation of civilian transportation and military training, the Army requested another alternative alignment near the southern boundary of Keamuku for the realignment of this section of Saddle Road. In Section I, the existing Saddle Road is a narrow, winding, two-lane road with steep grades, sharp curves, poor pavement, substandard drainage, and no shoulders. Saddle Road is an important cross-island link for business travel, the transport of goods and services, tourism, recreation, shopping, and commuting, and is the only paved arterial serving the army training facility, the astronomical observatory on Mauna Kea, Waiki'i Ranch, upper Kaumana, Mauna Kea State Recreation Area, Kilohana Girl Scout Camp, and major hunting areas. Saddle Roads accident rate of 5.43 accidents per million vehicle miles in 1996 was significantly higher than the average rate for rural two-lane highways throughout the State of Hawaii and roadway deficiencies also hindered the timely response of emergency vehicles responding to fires, accidents, and other emergencies. Issues of concern include the effects on protected species of flora and fauna, critical habitat for endangered palila, wetlands and biological habitats of importance, archaeological resources, fire hazard, residential displacement, and noise. The proposed new 10.3-mile alignment, termed W-7, would traverse the Keamuku parcel in a westerly direction, roughly paralleling the southern boundary of Keamuku until near Mamalahoa Highway, where it would veer slightly north. W-7 would have a maximum grade of 8.0 percent and an average grade of about 6.0 percent. About 250 acres of right-of-way would be required. Mamalahoa Highway would be crossed at-grade or by a grade-separated structure. Construction would occur over about two years and cost $58 million in 2007 dollars. The No Action Alternative was already rejected and is referenced for baseline purposes only. If it is not feasible to construct the preferred alternative, alignment W-7, it is expected that the W-3 alignment would be constructed. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The realigned highway would reduce conflicts and hazards with military operations, improve pavement conditions, increase safety and capacity, improve quality of traffic flow, decrease cross-island travel times by approximately 30 minutes, and stimulate economic growth and development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed improvement of the road could increase the likelihood of wildfire. After construction, there would be a permanently heightened risk of wildfire ignition due to the substantial increase in the number of vehicles traversing the area. Construction of the proposed highway would generate a corridor along which introduced species, both plant and animal, would be able more readily to gain access to native habitat and would result in a change in visual character due to the introduction of a paved road to the existing pastoral setting. The proposed alignment would take 3,200 square feet of the Old Waimea-Kona Belt Road which is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and final EISs, see 97-0451D, Volume 21, Number 6 and 99-0397F, Volume 23, Number 4, respectively. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 09-0442D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100048, Final supplemental EIS--336 pages and maps, Appendices--908 pages and maps, February 16, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-HI-SEIS-10-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Fire Prevention KW - Fires KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Roads KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Army Garrison, Hawaii KW - Hawaii KW - Pohakuloa Training Area, Hawaii UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826471?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=Dragan&rft.date=2015-09-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=179&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Cognition%2C+Brain%2C+Behavior%3A+An+Interdisciplinary+Journal&rft.issn=12248398&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SADDLE ROAD (STATE ROUTE 200), MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY (STATE ROUTE 190) TO MILEPOST 41 (FHWA PROJECT NUMBER 200(00)), HAWAII COUNTY, HAWAII. AN - 16388769; 14179 AB - PURPOSE: A new alternative alignment for the proposed improvement of Section I of Saddle Road, which extends from Mamalahoa Highway (State Route (SR) 190) near milepost 53 to milepost 41, making up the western end of Saddle Road near Hilo, Hawaii, is proposed. Saddle Road extends between mileposts 6 and 53. Sections II and III of Saddle Road, between mileposts 8.5 and 41, have already been completed or are advancing towards completion along the alignments identified in the 1999 final EIS for the entire project. Section IV is currently in final design, leaving Section I as the last piece planned for construction. In 2006, the U.S. Army purchased for military training a property known as the Keamuku parcel. The alignment selected for Section I of the improved Saddle Road in the 1999 Record of Decision, termed W-3, essentially divides the Keamuku parcel in half. In order to provide a safe separation of civilian transportation and military training, the Army requested another alternative alignment near the southern boundary of Keamuku for the realignment of this section of Saddle Road. In Section I, the existing Saddle Road is a narrow, winding, two-lane road with steep grades, sharp curves, poor pavement, substandard drainage, and no shoulders. Saddle Road is an important cross-island link for business travel, the transport of goods and services, tourism, recreation, shopping, and commuting, and is the only paved arterial serving the army training facility, the astronomical observatory on Mauna Kea, Waiki'i Ranch, upper Kaumana, Mauna Kea State Recreation Area, Kilohana Girl Scout Camp, and major hunting areas. Saddle Roads accident rate of 5.43 accidents per million vehicle miles in 1996 was significantly higher than the average rate for rural two-lane highways throughout the State of Hawaii and roadway deficiencies also hindered the timely response of emergency vehicles responding to fires, accidents, and other emergencies. Issues of concern include the effects on protected species of flora and fauna, critical habitat for endangered palila, wetlands and biological habitats of importance, archaeological resources, fire hazard, residential displacement, and noise. The proposed new 10.3-mile alignment, termed W-7, would traverse the Keamuku parcel in a westerly direction, roughly paralleling the southern boundary of Keamuku until near Mamalahoa Highway, where it would veer slightly north. W-7 would have a maximum grade of 8.0 percent and an average grade of about 6.0 percent. About 250 acres of right-of-way would be required. Mamalahoa Highway would be crossed at-grade or by a grade-separated structure. Construction would occur over about two years and cost $58 million in 2007 dollars. The No Action Alternative was already rejected and is referenced for baseline purposes only. If it is not feasible to construct the preferred alternative, alignment W-7, it is expected that the W-3 alignment would be constructed. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The realigned highway would reduce conflicts and hazards with military operations, improve pavement conditions, increase safety and capacity, improve quality of traffic flow, decrease cross-island travel times by approximately 30 minutes, and stimulate economic growth and development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed improvement of the road could increase the likelihood of wildfire. After construction, there would be a permanently heightened risk of wildfire ignition due to the substantial increase in the number of vehicles traversing the area. Construction of the proposed highway would generate a corridor along which introduced species, both plant and animal, would be able more readily to gain access to native habitat and would result in a change in visual character due to the introduction of a paved road to the existing pastoral setting. The proposed alignment would take 3,200 square feet of the Old Waimea-Kona Belt Road which is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and final EISs, see 97-0451D, Volume 21, Number 6 and 99-0397F, Volume 23, Number 4, respectively. For the abstract of the supplemental draft EIS, see 09-0442D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100048, Final supplemental EIS--336 pages and maps, Appendices--908 pages and maps, February 16, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-HI-SEIS-10-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Fire Prevention KW - Fires KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Military Facilities (Army) KW - Motor Vehicles KW - Roads KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Soils Surveys KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Army Garrison, Hawaii KW - Hawaii KW - Pohakuloa Training Area, Hawaii UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16388769?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SADDLE+ROAD+%28STATE+ROUTE+200%29%2C+MAMALAHOA+HIGHWAY+%28STATE+ROUTE+190%29+TO+MILEPOST+41+%28FHWA+PROJECT+NUMBER+200%2800%29%29%2C+HAWAII+COUNTY%2C+HAWAII.&rft.title=SADDLE+ROAD+%28STATE+ROUTE+200%29%2C+MAMALAHOA+HIGHWAY+%28STATE+ROUTE+190%29+TO+MILEPOST+41+%28FHWA+PROJECT+NUMBER+200%2800%29%29%2C+HAWAII+COUNTY%2C+HAWAII.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lakewood, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 16, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4A LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SUTTER AND SACRAMENTO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4A LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SUTTER AND SACRAMENTO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876254340; 14173-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4a Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to incorporate the NLIP into the Natomas components of the federally authorized American Rivers Common Features Project and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Landside Improvements Project consists of four phases and the Phase 4 Project was divided into two subphases to provide construction flexibility. The Phase 4a Project is one subphase and includes proposed improvements affecting approximately six miles of the levee system in Reaches 10-15 of the Sacramento River east levee. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and two action alternatives are analyzed in this final EIS. The Adjacent Levee Alternative (proposed alternative) would include levee raising and seepage remediation along the Sacramento River east levee (Reaches 10-15) and in two locations of the Natomas Cross Canal south levee as well as relocation and extension of the Riverside Canal. Parcels within the Fisherman's Lake Borrow Area would be the primary source of soil borrow for Phase 4a construction; those parcels excavated for borrow material would be reclaimed as agricultural land, grassland, or managed marsh depending on their location and existing land use. Wells would be constructed to provide a water supply for habitat features. The Raise and Strengthen Levee in Place (RSLIP) Alternative would be the same as described for the proposed action except for the method of levee raising and rehabilitation, the extent of levee degrade to construct cutoff walls, and extent of encroachment removal along the Sacramento River east levee. The Phase 4a Project would be constructed at the same time as portions of the Phase 2 and 3 Projects. Construction of the Phase 4a Project is planned to begin in 2010 and anticipated to be completed in 2011. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. Implementation of the proposed plan would prevent designation of the area as a special flood hazard area which would preclude new development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert 676 acres of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would potentially temporarily physically divide or disrupt an established community. Several project components would require substantial land acquisition to accommodate the expanded levee, seepage berm, and canal footprints. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0456D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100042, Final EIS--580 pages and maps, CD-ROM, February 12, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254340?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4A+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SUTTER+AND+SACRAMENTO+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4A+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SUTTER+AND+SACRAMENTO+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4A LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SUTTER AND SACRAMENTO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4A LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SUTTER AND SACRAMENTO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 876250989; 14173-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4a Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to incorporate the NLIP into the Natomas components of the federally authorized American Rivers Common Features Project and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Landside Improvements Project consists of four phases and the Phase 4 Project was divided into two subphases to provide construction flexibility. The Phase 4a Project is one subphase and includes proposed improvements affecting approximately six miles of the levee system in Reaches 10-15 of the Sacramento River east levee. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and two action alternatives are analyzed in this final EIS. The Adjacent Levee Alternative (proposed alternative) would include levee raising and seepage remediation along the Sacramento River east levee (Reaches 10-15) and in two locations of the Natomas Cross Canal south levee as well as relocation and extension of the Riverside Canal. Parcels within the Fisherman's Lake Borrow Area would be the primary source of soil borrow for Phase 4a construction; those parcels excavated for borrow material would be reclaimed as agricultural land, grassland, or managed marsh depending on their location and existing land use. Wells would be constructed to provide a water supply for habitat features. The Raise and Strengthen Levee in Place (RSLIP) Alternative would be the same as described for the proposed action except for the method of levee raising and rehabilitation, the extent of levee degrade to construct cutoff walls, and extent of encroachment removal along the Sacramento River east levee. The Phase 4a Project would be constructed at the same time as portions of the Phase 2 and 3 Projects. Construction of the Phase 4a Project is planned to begin in 2010 and anticipated to be completed in 2011. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. Implementation of the proposed plan would prevent designation of the area as a special flood hazard area which would preclude new development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert 676 acres of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would potentially temporarily physically divide or disrupt an established community. Several project components would require substantial land acquisition to accommodate the expanded levee, seepage berm, and canal footprints. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0456D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100042, Final EIS--580 pages and maps, CD-ROM, February 12, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876250989?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4A+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SUTTER+AND+SACRAMENTO+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4A+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SUTTER+AND+SACRAMENTO+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US-31 HOLLAND TO GRAND HAVEN PROJECT, OTTAWA COUNTY, MICHIGAN. [Part 3 of 3] T2 - US-31 HOLLAND TO GRAND HAVEN PROJECT, OTTAWA COUNTY, MICHIGAN. AN - 756826952; 14172-100041_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of US 31 between the cities of Holland and Grand Haven, and construction of a new route (M-231) west of 120th Avenue in Robinson and Crockery townships, Ottawa County, Michigan are proposed. US 31 is a principal arterial in the National Highway System serving north-south traffic along the Lake Michigan shoreline, providing access to more than 15 state parks as well as hundreds of tourist-oriented businesses and other recreational opportunities. Travel demand is exceeding the capacity of the existing US 31 system due to shifting land use patterns, growth in jobs and households, and increasing travel. Widely spaced crossings of the Grand River and the scheduled and unscheduled bascule bridge openings on existing US 31 in Grand Haven contribute to congested traffic conditions. Since publication of the draft EIS in October 1998, several projects in the corridor study area have improved the condition of US 31 and this final EIS analyzes a preferred alternative corridor in western Ottawa County and a No Action Alternative. The preferred alternative (Alternative F-1a) would include: a new, 7.1-mile two-lane roadway (M-231), with a new Grand River crossing, located along an alignment between Lake Michigan Drive (M-45) and the Interstate 96 (I-96)/M-104 interchange area; additional lanes on M-104 in the vicinity of the new M-104/M-231 junction; a new I-96/M-231 interchange; and new ramps at the existing I-96/112th Avenue interchange. Additional lanes on M-231 would likely be needed in the future. Under Alternative F-1a, improvements would be made to key congested segments of existing US-31 in Grand Haven from south of Franklin Street to north of Jackson Street, and in Holland from Lakewood Boulevard north to Quincy Street. Total cost of the project is estimated at $170 million in 2014 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: In addition to relieving congestion and addressing safety problems on the existing route, the project would contribute significantly to the expanding economy of Ottawa County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 14 farm parcels, 14.4 acres of prime farmland, 101.4 acres of locally important farmland, 15 commercial establishments, 61 residential units, and 3.1acres of wetland. Noise levels would exceed federal standards at 34 receptors. The project would affect one natural area and 17 sites containing hazardous wastes could be encountered. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 99-0055D, Volume 23, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100041, 670 pages and maps, February 12, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MI-EIS-98-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Michigan KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826952?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=Yan&rft.date=2015-09-01&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1152&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Acta+Psychologica+Sinica&rft.issn=0439755X&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lansing, Michigan; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US-31 HOLLAND TO GRAND HAVEN PROJECT, OTTAWA COUNTY, MICHIGAN. [Part 2 of 3] T2 - US-31 HOLLAND TO GRAND HAVEN PROJECT, OTTAWA COUNTY, MICHIGAN. AN - 756826940; 14172-100041_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of US 31 between the cities of Holland and Grand Haven, and construction of a new route (M-231) west of 120th Avenue in Robinson and Crockery townships, Ottawa County, Michigan are proposed. US 31 is a principal arterial in the National Highway System serving north-south traffic along the Lake Michigan shoreline, providing access to more than 15 state parks as well as hundreds of tourist-oriented businesses and other recreational opportunities. Travel demand is exceeding the capacity of the existing US 31 system due to shifting land use patterns, growth in jobs and households, and increasing travel. Widely spaced crossings of the Grand River and the scheduled and unscheduled bascule bridge openings on existing US 31 in Grand Haven contribute to congested traffic conditions. Since publication of the draft EIS in October 1998, several projects in the corridor study area have improved the condition of US 31 and this final EIS analyzes a preferred alternative corridor in western Ottawa County and a No Action Alternative. The preferred alternative (Alternative F-1a) would include: a new, 7.1-mile two-lane roadway (M-231), with a new Grand River crossing, located along an alignment between Lake Michigan Drive (M-45) and the Interstate 96 (I-96)/M-104 interchange area; additional lanes on M-104 in the vicinity of the new M-104/M-231 junction; a new I-96/M-231 interchange; and new ramps at the existing I-96/112th Avenue interchange. Additional lanes on M-231 would likely be needed in the future. Under Alternative F-1a, improvements would be made to key congested segments of existing US-31 in Grand Haven from south of Franklin Street to north of Jackson Street, and in Holland from Lakewood Boulevard north to Quincy Street. Total cost of the project is estimated at $170 million in 2014 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: In addition to relieving congestion and addressing safety problems on the existing route, the project would contribute significantly to the expanding economy of Ottawa County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 14 farm parcels, 14.4 acres of prime farmland, 101.4 acres of locally important farmland, 15 commercial establishments, 61 residential units, and 3.1acres of wetland. Noise levels would exceed federal standards at 34 receptors. The project would affect one natural area and 17 sites containing hazardous wastes could be encountered. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 99-0055D, Volume 23, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100041, 670 pages and maps, February 12, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MI-EIS-98-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Michigan KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826940?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US-31+HOLLAND+TO+GRAND+HAVEN+PROJECT%2C+OTTAWA+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.title=US-31+HOLLAND+TO+GRAND+HAVEN+PROJECT%2C+OTTAWA+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lansing, Michigan; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST CONNECTOR IN DES MOINES, POLK COUNTY, IOWA. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - SOUTHEAST CONNECTOR IN DES MOINES, POLK COUNTY, IOWA. AN - 756826868; 14174-100043_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new arterial roadway that would traverse the southeastern quadrant of Des Moines in Polk County, Iowa is proposed. The urban highway, to be known as the Southeast Connector, would extend from the Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway terminus at Southeast 14th Street to the Vandalia Road/US 65 Bypass interchange. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this condensed final EIS. The Yellow Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would follow part of the Southeast Diagonal Corridor alignment identified in a prior study and part of a north-to-south corridor alignment. This alternative would extend eastward from Southeast 14th Street along an alignment mid-way between Scott Avenue and East Market Street. The mid-block alignment would then follow the railroad right-of-way to the southeast through the Chesterfield neighborhood before turning east near Pleasant Hill Boulevard. From there, the alignment would proceed a short distance eastward until it reached the eastern termini at US 65. It is noted that Chesterfield is not currently a recognized neighborhood; however, for the purposes of this study, the housing cluster between Southeast 20th Street and Southeast 34th Street from East Market Street to CB&Q Street are referred to as Chesterfield. A new bridge would be built across Four Mile Creek, and a railroad spur would be required. The Brown Alternative would also follow part of the Southeast Diagonal Corridor alignment and part of a north-to-south corridor alignment. This alternative would extend eastward from Southeast 14th Street along Scott Avenue to CB&Q Street, where it would proceed along CB&Q Street eastward past the south side of Sunset Beach Lake. From that point, the Brown alignment would meet a city-owned rail right-of-way and follow it southeast through a salvage yard to Vandalia Road, finally running eastward along Vandalia Road to US 65. Costs of the Yellow alternative are estimated at $125 million in 2014 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The connector would provide a safe, efficient, and direct route from downtown Des Moines to the US 65 outer beltway on the southeast side of the city. The facility would enhance system connectivity, improving access to communities and businesses along the corridor. System capacity would also be enhanced, supporting projected growth. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would result in the displacement of 15 residences and seven businesses; business relocations would affect 102 to 212 jobs. The taxable value of the land to be placed into public ownership in the city of Des Moines would amount to $2.5 million, or 0.02 percent of the city's tax base. The taxable value of the land to be placed into public ownership in Polk County would amount to $2.7 million, or 0.01 percent of the city's tax base. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards at 10 residences and two businesses. Highway construction would permanently displace 6 acres of wetlands, and 86,000 cubic yards of fill would be placed in the 100-year floodplain and 14,600 cubic yards in a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers floodway easement. Construction workers would encounter 17 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0088D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100043, Final EIS--168 pages and maps, Draft EIS--241 pages and maps, CD-ROM, February 12, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Dikes KW - Easements KW - Floodplains KW - Floodways KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Iowa KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826868?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+CONNECTOR+IN+DES+MOINES%2C+POLK+COUNTY%2C+IOWA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+CONNECTOR+IN+DES+MOINES%2C+POLK+COUNTY%2C+IOWA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Ames, Iowa; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US-31 HOLLAND TO GRAND HAVEN PROJECT, OTTAWA COUNTY, MICHIGAN. [Part 1 of 3] T2 - US-31 HOLLAND TO GRAND HAVEN PROJECT, OTTAWA COUNTY, MICHIGAN. AN - 756826797; 14172-100041_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of US 31 between the cities of Holland and Grand Haven, and construction of a new route (M-231) west of 120th Avenue in Robinson and Crockery townships, Ottawa County, Michigan are proposed. US 31 is a principal arterial in the National Highway System serving north-south traffic along the Lake Michigan shoreline, providing access to more than 15 state parks as well as hundreds of tourist-oriented businesses and other recreational opportunities. Travel demand is exceeding the capacity of the existing US 31 system due to shifting land use patterns, growth in jobs and households, and increasing travel. Widely spaced crossings of the Grand River and the scheduled and unscheduled bascule bridge openings on existing US 31 in Grand Haven contribute to congested traffic conditions. Since publication of the draft EIS in October 1998, several projects in the corridor study area have improved the condition of US 31 and this final EIS analyzes a preferred alternative corridor in western Ottawa County and a No Action Alternative. The preferred alternative (Alternative F-1a) would include: a new, 7.1-mile two-lane roadway (M-231), with a new Grand River crossing, located along an alignment between Lake Michigan Drive (M-45) and the Interstate 96 (I-96)/M-104 interchange area; additional lanes on M-104 in the vicinity of the new M-104/M-231 junction; a new I-96/M-231 interchange; and new ramps at the existing I-96/112th Avenue interchange. Additional lanes on M-231 would likely be needed in the future. Under Alternative F-1a, improvements would be made to key congested segments of existing US-31 in Grand Haven from south of Franklin Street to north of Jackson Street, and in Holland from Lakewood Boulevard north to Quincy Street. Total cost of the project is estimated at $170 million in 2014 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: In addition to relieving congestion and addressing safety problems on the existing route, the project would contribute significantly to the expanding economy of Ottawa County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 14 farm parcels, 14.4 acres of prime farmland, 101.4 acres of locally important farmland, 15 commercial establishments, 61 residential units, and 3.1acres of wetland. Noise levels would exceed federal standards at 34 receptors. The project would affect one natural area and 17 sites containing hazardous wastes could be encountered. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 99-0055D, Volume 23, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100041, 670 pages and maps, February 12, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MI-EIS-98-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Michigan KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826797?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US-31+HOLLAND+TO+GRAND+HAVEN+PROJECT%2C+OTTAWA+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.title=US-31+HOLLAND+TO+GRAND+HAVEN+PROJECT%2C+OTTAWA+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lansing, Michigan; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NATOMAS LEVEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE 4A LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, SUTTER AND SACRAMENTO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA. AN - 16390572; 14173 AB - PURPOSE: The Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP), Phase 4a Landside Improvements Project, consisting of improvements to a portion of the Natomas Basin's perimeter levee system in Sacramento and Sutter counties, California, is proposed. The improvements and associated landscape and irrigation/drainage infrastructure modifications are proposed in order to provide 100-year flood protection and to incorporate the NLIP into the Natomas components of the federally authorized American Rivers Common Features Project and to bring the entire 42-mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with federal and state standards for levees protecting urban areas. The Landside Improvements Project consists of four phases and the Phase 4 Project was divided into two subphases to provide construction flexibility. The Phase 4a Project is one subphase and includes proposed improvements affecting approximately six miles of the levee system in Reaches 10-15 of the Sacramento River east levee. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative and two action alternatives are analyzed in this final EIS. The Adjacent Levee Alternative (proposed alternative) would include levee raising and seepage remediation along the Sacramento River east levee (Reaches 10-15) and in two locations of the Natomas Cross Canal south levee as well as relocation and extension of the Riverside Canal. Parcels within the Fisherman's Lake Borrow Area would be the primary source of soil borrow for Phase 4a construction; those parcels excavated for borrow material would be reclaimed as agricultural land, grassland, or managed marsh depending on their location and existing land use. Wells would be constructed to provide a water supply for habitat features. The Raise and Strengthen Levee in Place (RSLIP) Alternative would be the same as described for the proposed action except for the method of levee raising and rehabilitation, the extent of levee degrade to construct cutoff walls, and extent of encroachment removal along the Sacramento River east levee. The Phase 4a Project would be constructed at the same time as portions of the Phase 2 and 3 Projects. Construction of the Phase 4a Project is planned to begin in 2010 and anticipated to be completed in 2011. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Protecting the Natomas Basin floodplain, which is occupied by 83,000 residents, would help the area avoid $7.4 billion in potential damage from uncontrolled flooding, as well as the release of toxic and hazardous materials, contamination of groundwater, and damage to the metropolitan power and transport grids. Implementation of the proposed plan would prevent designation of the area as a special flood hazard area which would preclude new development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed alternative would contribute to air pollutant emissions, permanently convert 676 acres of prime farmland, lead to potential loss of mineral resources and woodland habitats, and impact Swainson's hawk and other protected species of birds. Implementation would potentially temporarily physically divide or disrupt an established community. Several project components would require substantial land acquisition to accommodate the expanded levee, seepage berm, and canal footprints. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601), PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0456D, Volume 33, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100042, Final EIS--580 pages and maps, CD-ROM, February 12, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Water KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Birds KW - Borrow Pits KW - Canals KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Erosion Control KW - Farmlands KW - Flood Control KW - Flood Protection KW - Floodplains KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrology KW - Irrigation KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Reclamation Plans KW - Rivers KW - Water Quality KW - Wells KW - California KW - Sacramento River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 14 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16390572?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4A+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SUTTER+AND+SACRAMENTO+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=NATOMAS+LEVEE+IMPROVEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHASE+4A+LANDSIDE+IMPROVEMENTS+PROJECT%2C+SUTTER+AND+SACRAMENTO+COUNTIES%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US-31 HOLLAND TO GRAND HAVEN PROJECT, OTTAWA COUNTY, MICHIGAN. AN - 16382568; 14172 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of US 31 between the cities of Holland and Grand Haven, and construction of a new route (M-231) west of 120th Avenue in Robinson and Crockery townships, Ottawa County, Michigan are proposed. US 31 is a principal arterial in the National Highway System serving north-south traffic along the Lake Michigan shoreline, providing access to more than 15 state parks as well as hundreds of tourist-oriented businesses and other recreational opportunities. Travel demand is exceeding the capacity of the existing US 31 system due to shifting land use patterns, growth in jobs and households, and increasing travel. Widely spaced crossings of the Grand River and the scheduled and unscheduled bascule bridge openings on existing US 31 in Grand Haven contribute to congested traffic conditions. Since publication of the draft EIS in October 1998, several projects in the corridor study area have improved the condition of US 31 and this final EIS analyzes a preferred alternative corridor in western Ottawa County and a No Action Alternative. The preferred alternative (Alternative F-1a) would include: a new, 7.1-mile two-lane roadway (M-231), with a new Grand River crossing, located along an alignment between Lake Michigan Drive (M-45) and the Interstate 96 (I-96)/M-104 interchange area; additional lanes on M-104 in the vicinity of the new M-104/M-231 junction; a new I-96/M-231 interchange; and new ramps at the existing I-96/112th Avenue interchange. Additional lanes on M-231 would likely be needed in the future. Under Alternative F-1a, improvements would be made to key congested segments of existing US-31 in Grand Haven from south of Franklin Street to north of Jackson Street, and in Holland from Lakewood Boulevard north to Quincy Street. Total cost of the project is estimated at $170 million in 2014 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: In addition to relieving congestion and addressing safety problems on the existing route, the project would contribute significantly to the expanding economy of Ottawa County. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 14 farm parcels, 14.4 acres of prime farmland, 101.4 acres of locally important farmland, 15 commercial establishments, 61 residential units, and 3.1acres of wetland. Noise levels would exceed federal standards at 34 receptors. The project would affect one natural area and 17 sites containing hazardous wastes could be encountered. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 99-0055D, Volume 23, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100041, 670 pages and maps, February 12, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MI-EIS-98-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Michigan KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16382568?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US-31+HOLLAND+TO+GRAND+HAVEN+PROJECT%2C+OTTAWA+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.title=US-31+HOLLAND+TO+GRAND+HAVEN+PROJECT%2C+OTTAWA+COUNTY%2C+MICHIGAN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Lansing, Michigan; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SOUTHEAST CONNECTOR IN DES MOINES, POLK COUNTY, IOWA. AN - 16382311; 14174 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new arterial roadway that would traverse the southeastern quadrant of Des Moines in Polk County, Iowa is proposed. The urban highway, to be known as the Southeast Connector, would extend from the Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway terminus at Southeast 14th Street to the Vandalia Road/US 65 Bypass interchange. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this condensed final EIS. The Yellow Alternative, which is the preferred alternative, would follow part of the Southeast Diagonal Corridor alignment identified in a prior study and part of a north-to-south corridor alignment. This alternative would extend eastward from Southeast 14th Street along an alignment mid-way between Scott Avenue and East Market Street. The mid-block alignment would then follow the railroad right-of-way to the southeast through the Chesterfield neighborhood before turning east near Pleasant Hill Boulevard. From there, the alignment would proceed a short distance eastward until it reached the eastern termini at US 65. It is noted that Chesterfield is not currently a recognized neighborhood; however, for the purposes of this study, the housing cluster between Southeast 20th Street and Southeast 34th Street from East Market Street to CB&Q Street are referred to as Chesterfield. A new bridge would be built across Four Mile Creek, and a railroad spur would be required. The Brown Alternative would also follow part of the Southeast Diagonal Corridor alignment and part of a north-to-south corridor alignment. This alternative would extend eastward from Southeast 14th Street along Scott Avenue to CB&Q Street, where it would proceed along CB&Q Street eastward past the south side of Sunset Beach Lake. From that point, the Brown alignment would meet a city-owned rail right-of-way and follow it southeast through a salvage yard to Vandalia Road, finally running eastward along Vandalia Road to US 65. Costs of the Yellow alternative are estimated at $125 million in 2014 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The connector would provide a safe, efficient, and direct route from downtown Des Moines to the US 65 outer beltway on the southeast side of the city. The facility would enhance system connectivity, improving access to communities and businesses along the corridor. System capacity would also be enhanced, supporting projected growth. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Rights-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would result in the displacement of 15 residences and seven businesses; business relocations would affect 102 to 212 jobs. The taxable value of the land to be placed into public ownership in the city of Des Moines would amount to $2.5 million, or 0.02 percent of the city's tax base. The taxable value of the land to be placed into public ownership in Polk County would amount to $2.7 million, or 0.01 percent of the city's tax base. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards at 10 residences and two businesses. Highway construction would permanently displace 6 acres of wetlands, and 86,000 cubic yards of fill would be placed in the 100-year floodplain and 14,600 cubic yards in a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers floodway easement. Construction workers would encounter 17 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0088D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 100043, Final EIS--168 pages and maps, Draft EIS--241 pages and maps, CD-ROM, February 12, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Dikes KW - Easements KW - Floodplains KW - Floodways KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Iowa KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, NPDES Permits KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16382311?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-02-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SOUTHEAST+CONNECTOR+IN+DES+MOINES%2C+POLK+COUNTY%2C+IOWA.&rft.title=SOUTHEAST+CONNECTOR+IN+DES+MOINES%2C+POLK+COUNTY%2C+IOWA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Ames, Iowa; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: February 12, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Macro Prediction Model of Road Traffic Accident Based on Neural Network AN - 867739869; 14691930 AB - Road traffic safety has generally attracted the attention of the whole society. In order to scientifically and accurately forecast the future road traffic safety situation in China, evaluation indexes and main influence factors of road traffic safety were analyzed. Macro traffic accident prediction models combined with neural network and genetic algorithm and BP neural network were built respectively, which traffic accident death toll was selected as the evolution index and three factors were taken as parameters, including motor vehicle amount, highway mileage and per capital gdp. The network used the traffic accident data from 1978 to 1998 as training samples. And the data from 1999 to 2004 were used to check the models. Forecasting result shows that neural network model based on genetic algorithms has higher prediction accuracy and more network generalization than those of BP neural network; the forecasting values of accident death toll in 2010 and 2020 are 139 thousand people and 167 thousand people respectively. JF - Journal of Wuhan University of Technology (Transportation Science & Engineering) AU - Qin, L AU - Shao, C AU - Zhao, L AD - Department of Transportation and Logistics Engineering Shandong Jiaotong University, Jinan 250023, China Y1 - 2010/02// PY - 2010 DA - Feb 2010 SP - 154 EP - 157 PB - China Educational Publications Import and Export Corp., 15 Xueyuan Road Beijing 100083 People's People's Republic of China VL - 34 IS - 1 SN - 1006-2823, 1006-2823 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - China, People's Rep., Hubei Prov., Wuhan KW - Artificial intelligence KW - Mortality KW - Accidents KW - safety engineering KW - Transportation KW - prediction models KW - neural networks KW - Highways KW - traffic safety KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/867739869?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahealthsafetyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Wuhan+University+of+Technology+%28Transportation+Science+%26+Engineering%29&rft.atitle=Macro+Prediction+Model+of+Road+Traffic+Accident+Based+on+Neural+Network&rft.au=Qin%2C+L%3BShao%2C+C%3BZhao%2C+L&rft.aulast=Qin&rft.aufirst=L&rft.date=2010-02-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=154&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Wuhan+University+of+Technology+%28Transportation+Science+%26+Engineering%29&rft.issn=10062823&rft_id=info:doi/10.3963%2Fj.issn.1006-2823.2010.01.038 LA - Chinese DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-05-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Mortality; Artificial intelligence; Accidents; Transportation; safety engineering; prediction models; neural networks; Highways; traffic safety; China, People's Rep., Hubei Prov., Wuhan DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3963/j.issn.1006-2823.2010.01.038 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 3 of 6] T2 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 756827039; 14147-100020_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a fixed guideway project to improve transit service in the University Corridor of the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas (METRO) service area is proposed. The University Corridor is an east-west project located near downtown Houston in an area that continues to increase in population and employment opportunities, while the traffic capacity of the existing roadway system has remained stagnant, resulting in increased travel times, delays, and excessive air pollutant emissions. This situation has also placed significant limitations on economic development. Congestion is particularly heavy along the corridor under consideration, which includes US 59, Richmond Avenue, and Westpark Drive. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, which would include all transportation facilities and services programmed for implementation by 2035, a transportation systems management alternative, and build alternatives, consisting of a new fixed guideway rapid transit line extending from Hillcroft Transit Center to either the University of Houston's Central Campus or the Eastwood Transit Center. The entire build project would lie within the city of Houston and utilize METRO-owned Westpark rights-of-way and existing roadways. The project would connect to the existing METRORail Red Line at Wheeler Station. The transit technologies considered in the draft EIS include light rail transit (LRT) and an initial Bus Rail Transit (BRT) system that could be converted to LRT in the future. The locally preferred alternative alignment would extend 11.36 miles from the Hillcroft Transit Center on the west to the Eastwood Transit Center on the east and utilize the LRT technology. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The guided rapid transit system would: maximize connectivity between the University Corridor and major activity centers and destinations; increase transit ridership in the corridor, and thereby reduce traffic congestion and contribute to the reduction in mobile sources of pollutant emissions; support public and private economic development and neighborhood revitalization efforts; provide transportation solutions that avoid disruption to neighborhoods, commercial districts, and historic areas; provide cost-effective and achievable transportation solutions for the corridor; and serve a diverse population within the study area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Though little land would be taken, rights-of-way development within the densely developed corridor would result in the displacement of numerous residences, businesses, religious organizations, government offices, and historic structures. Four districts eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. Though no rights-of-way would be required from parks or recreation areas, indirect impacts, primarily consisting of visual intrusions, would be numerous and significant. The project would traverse an area in violation of federal standards for ozone levels, though, as mentioned above, the project should benefit air quality in the corridor. Noise levels could affect up to 133 sensitive receptors. LRT operations would cause vibration impacts to some residences. Construction workers could encounter up to 285 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0284D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100020, Volume 1--788 pages, Volume 2--342 pages, Volume 3--112 pages, January 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827039?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 2 of 6] T2 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 756827027; 14147-100020_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a fixed guideway project to improve transit service in the University Corridor of the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas (METRO) service area is proposed. The University Corridor is an east-west project located near downtown Houston in an area that continues to increase in population and employment opportunities, while the traffic capacity of the existing roadway system has remained stagnant, resulting in increased travel times, delays, and excessive air pollutant emissions. This situation has also placed significant limitations on economic development. Congestion is particularly heavy along the corridor under consideration, which includes US 59, Richmond Avenue, and Westpark Drive. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, which would include all transportation facilities and services programmed for implementation by 2035, a transportation systems management alternative, and build alternatives, consisting of a new fixed guideway rapid transit line extending from Hillcroft Transit Center to either the University of Houston's Central Campus or the Eastwood Transit Center. The entire build project would lie within the city of Houston and utilize METRO-owned Westpark rights-of-way and existing roadways. The project would connect to the existing METRORail Red Line at Wheeler Station. The transit technologies considered in the draft EIS include light rail transit (LRT) and an initial Bus Rail Transit (BRT) system that could be converted to LRT in the future. The locally preferred alternative alignment would extend 11.36 miles from the Hillcroft Transit Center on the west to the Eastwood Transit Center on the east and utilize the LRT technology. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The guided rapid transit system would: maximize connectivity between the University Corridor and major activity centers and destinations; increase transit ridership in the corridor, and thereby reduce traffic congestion and contribute to the reduction in mobile sources of pollutant emissions; support public and private economic development and neighborhood revitalization efforts; provide transportation solutions that avoid disruption to neighborhoods, commercial districts, and historic areas; provide cost-effective and achievable transportation solutions for the corridor; and serve a diverse population within the study area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Though little land would be taken, rights-of-way development within the densely developed corridor would result in the displacement of numerous residences, businesses, religious organizations, government offices, and historic structures. Four districts eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. Though no rights-of-way would be required from parks or recreation areas, indirect impacts, primarily consisting of visual intrusions, would be numerous and significant. The project would traverse an area in violation of federal standards for ozone levels, though, as mentioned above, the project should benefit air quality in the corridor. Noise levels could affect up to 133 sensitive receptors. LRT operations would cause vibration impacts to some residences. Construction workers could encounter up to 285 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0284D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100020, Volume 1--788 pages, Volume 2--342 pages, Volume 3--112 pages, January 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827027?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 5 of 6] T2 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 756826897; 14147-100020_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a fixed guideway project to improve transit service in the University Corridor of the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas (METRO) service area is proposed. The University Corridor is an east-west project located near downtown Houston in an area that continues to increase in population and employment opportunities, while the traffic capacity of the existing roadway system has remained stagnant, resulting in increased travel times, delays, and excessive air pollutant emissions. This situation has also placed significant limitations on economic development. Congestion is particularly heavy along the corridor under consideration, which includes US 59, Richmond Avenue, and Westpark Drive. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, which would include all transportation facilities and services programmed for implementation by 2035, a transportation systems management alternative, and build alternatives, consisting of a new fixed guideway rapid transit line extending from Hillcroft Transit Center to either the University of Houston's Central Campus or the Eastwood Transit Center. The entire build project would lie within the city of Houston and utilize METRO-owned Westpark rights-of-way and existing roadways. The project would connect to the existing METRORail Red Line at Wheeler Station. The transit technologies considered in the draft EIS include light rail transit (LRT) and an initial Bus Rail Transit (BRT) system that could be converted to LRT in the future. The locally preferred alternative alignment would extend 11.36 miles from the Hillcroft Transit Center on the west to the Eastwood Transit Center on the east and utilize the LRT technology. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The guided rapid transit system would: maximize connectivity between the University Corridor and major activity centers and destinations; increase transit ridership in the corridor, and thereby reduce traffic congestion and contribute to the reduction in mobile sources of pollutant emissions; support public and private economic development and neighborhood revitalization efforts; provide transportation solutions that avoid disruption to neighborhoods, commercial districts, and historic areas; provide cost-effective and achievable transportation solutions for the corridor; and serve a diverse population within the study area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Though little land would be taken, rights-of-way development within the densely developed corridor would result in the displacement of numerous residences, businesses, religious organizations, government offices, and historic structures. Four districts eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. Though no rights-of-way would be required from parks or recreation areas, indirect impacts, primarily consisting of visual intrusions, would be numerous and significant. The project would traverse an area in violation of federal standards for ozone levels, though, as mentioned above, the project should benefit air quality in the corridor. Noise levels could affect up to 133 sensitive receptors. LRT operations would cause vibration impacts to some residences. Construction workers could encounter up to 285 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0284D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100020, Volume 1--788 pages, Volume 2--342 pages, Volume 3--112 pages, January 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826897?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 1 of 6] T2 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 756826890; 14147-100020_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a fixed guideway project to improve transit service in the University Corridor of the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas (METRO) service area is proposed. The University Corridor is an east-west project located near downtown Houston in an area that continues to increase in population and employment opportunities, while the traffic capacity of the existing roadway system has remained stagnant, resulting in increased travel times, delays, and excessive air pollutant emissions. This situation has also placed significant limitations on economic development. Congestion is particularly heavy along the corridor under consideration, which includes US 59, Richmond Avenue, and Westpark Drive. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, which would include all transportation facilities and services programmed for implementation by 2035, a transportation systems management alternative, and build alternatives, consisting of a new fixed guideway rapid transit line extending from Hillcroft Transit Center to either the University of Houston's Central Campus or the Eastwood Transit Center. The entire build project would lie within the city of Houston and utilize METRO-owned Westpark rights-of-way and existing roadways. The project would connect to the existing METRORail Red Line at Wheeler Station. The transit technologies considered in the draft EIS include light rail transit (LRT) and an initial Bus Rail Transit (BRT) system that could be converted to LRT in the future. The locally preferred alternative alignment would extend 11.36 miles from the Hillcroft Transit Center on the west to the Eastwood Transit Center on the east and utilize the LRT technology. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The guided rapid transit system would: maximize connectivity between the University Corridor and major activity centers and destinations; increase transit ridership in the corridor, and thereby reduce traffic congestion and contribute to the reduction in mobile sources of pollutant emissions; support public and private economic development and neighborhood revitalization efforts; provide transportation solutions that avoid disruption to neighborhoods, commercial districts, and historic areas; provide cost-effective and achievable transportation solutions for the corridor; and serve a diverse population within the study area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Though little land would be taken, rights-of-way development within the densely developed corridor would result in the displacement of numerous residences, businesses, religious organizations, government offices, and historic structures. Four districts eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. Though no rights-of-way would be required from parks or recreation areas, indirect impacts, primarily consisting of visual intrusions, would be numerous and significant. The project would traverse an area in violation of federal standards for ozone levels, though, as mentioned above, the project should benefit air quality in the corridor. Noise levels could affect up to 133 sensitive receptors. LRT operations would cause vibration impacts to some residences. Construction workers could encounter up to 285 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0284D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100020, Volume 1--788 pages, Volume 2--342 pages, Volume 3--112 pages, January 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826890?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 4 of 6] T2 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 756826851; 14147-100020_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a fixed guideway project to improve transit service in the University Corridor of the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas (METRO) service area is proposed. The University Corridor is an east-west project located near downtown Houston in an area that continues to increase in population and employment opportunities, while the traffic capacity of the existing roadway system has remained stagnant, resulting in increased travel times, delays, and excessive air pollutant emissions. This situation has also placed significant limitations on economic development. Congestion is particularly heavy along the corridor under consideration, which includes US 59, Richmond Avenue, and Westpark Drive. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, which would include all transportation facilities and services programmed for implementation by 2035, a transportation systems management alternative, and build alternatives, consisting of a new fixed guideway rapid transit line extending from Hillcroft Transit Center to either the University of Houston's Central Campus or the Eastwood Transit Center. The entire build project would lie within the city of Houston and utilize METRO-owned Westpark rights-of-way and existing roadways. The project would connect to the existing METRORail Red Line at Wheeler Station. The transit technologies considered in the draft EIS include light rail transit (LRT) and an initial Bus Rail Transit (BRT) system that could be converted to LRT in the future. The locally preferred alternative alignment would extend 11.36 miles from the Hillcroft Transit Center on the west to the Eastwood Transit Center on the east and utilize the LRT technology. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The guided rapid transit system would: maximize connectivity between the University Corridor and major activity centers and destinations; increase transit ridership in the corridor, and thereby reduce traffic congestion and contribute to the reduction in mobile sources of pollutant emissions; support public and private economic development and neighborhood revitalization efforts; provide transportation solutions that avoid disruption to neighborhoods, commercial districts, and historic areas; provide cost-effective and achievable transportation solutions for the corridor; and serve a diverse population within the study area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Though little land would be taken, rights-of-way development within the densely developed corridor would result in the displacement of numerous residences, businesses, religious organizations, government offices, and historic structures. Four districts eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. Though no rights-of-way would be required from parks or recreation areas, indirect impacts, primarily consisting of visual intrusions, would be numerous and significant. The project would traverse an area in violation of federal standards for ozone levels, though, as mentioned above, the project should benefit air quality in the corridor. Noise levels could affect up to 133 sensitive receptors. LRT operations would cause vibration impacts to some residences. Construction workers could encounter up to 285 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0284D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100020, Volume 1--788 pages, Volume 2--342 pages, Volume 3--112 pages, January 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826851?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. [Part 6 of 6] T2 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 756826597; 14147-100020_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a fixed guideway project to improve transit service in the University Corridor of the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas (METRO) service area is proposed. The University Corridor is an east-west project located near downtown Houston in an area that continues to increase in population and employment opportunities, while the traffic capacity of the existing roadway system has remained stagnant, resulting in increased travel times, delays, and excessive air pollutant emissions. This situation has also placed significant limitations on economic development. Congestion is particularly heavy along the corridor under consideration, which includes US 59, Richmond Avenue, and Westpark Drive. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, which would include all transportation facilities and services programmed for implementation by 2035, a transportation systems management alternative, and build alternatives, consisting of a new fixed guideway rapid transit line extending from Hillcroft Transit Center to either the University of Houston's Central Campus or the Eastwood Transit Center. The entire build project would lie within the city of Houston and utilize METRO-owned Westpark rights-of-way and existing roadways. The project would connect to the existing METRORail Red Line at Wheeler Station. The transit technologies considered in the draft EIS include light rail transit (LRT) and an initial Bus Rail Transit (BRT) system that could be converted to LRT in the future. The locally preferred alternative alignment would extend 11.36 miles from the Hillcroft Transit Center on the west to the Eastwood Transit Center on the east and utilize the LRT technology. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The guided rapid transit system would: maximize connectivity between the University Corridor and major activity centers and destinations; increase transit ridership in the corridor, and thereby reduce traffic congestion and contribute to the reduction in mobile sources of pollutant emissions; support public and private economic development and neighborhood revitalization efforts; provide transportation solutions that avoid disruption to neighborhoods, commercial districts, and historic areas; provide cost-effective and achievable transportation solutions for the corridor; and serve a diverse population within the study area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Though little land would be taken, rights-of-way development within the densely developed corridor would result in the displacement of numerous residences, businesses, religious organizations, government offices, and historic structures. Four districts eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. Though no rights-of-way would be required from parks or recreation areas, indirect impacts, primarily consisting of visual intrusions, would be numerous and significant. The project would traverse an area in violation of federal standards for ozone levels, though, as mentioned above, the project should benefit air quality in the corridor. Noise levels could affect up to 133 sensitive receptors. LRT operations would cause vibration impacts to some residences. Construction workers could encounter up to 285 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0284D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100020, Volume 1--788 pages, Volume 2--342 pages, Volume 3--112 pages, January 21, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826597?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UNIVERSITY CORRIDOR FIXED GUIDEWAY IN HOUSTON, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. AN - 16396273; 14147 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a fixed guideway project to improve transit service in the University Corridor of the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas (METRO) service area is proposed. The University Corridor is an east-west project located near downtown Houston in an area that continues to increase in population and employment opportunities, while the traffic capacity of the existing roadway system has remained stagnant, resulting in increased travel times, delays, and excessive air pollutant emissions. This situation has also placed significant limitations on economic development. Congestion is particularly heavy along the corridor under consideration, which includes US 59, Richmond Avenue, and Westpark Drive. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, which would include all transportation facilities and services programmed for implementation by 2035, a transportation systems management alternative, and build alternatives, consisting of a new fixed guideway rapid transit line extending from Hillcroft Transit Center to either the University of Houston's Central Campus or the Eastwood Transit Center. The entire build project would lie within the city of Houston and utilize METRO-owned Westpark rights-of-way and existing roadways. The project would connect to the existing METRORail Red Line at Wheeler Station. The transit technologies considered in the draft EIS include light rail transit (LRT) and an initial Bus Rail Transit (BRT) system that could be converted to LRT in the future. The locally preferred alternative alignment would extend 11.36 miles from the Hillcroft Transit Center on the west to the Eastwood Transit Center on the east and utilize the LRT technology. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The guided rapid transit system would: maximize connectivity between the University Corridor and major activity centers and destinations; increase transit ridership in the corridor, and thereby reduce traffic congestion and contribute to the reduction in mobile sources of pollutant emissions; support public and private economic development and neighborhood revitalization efforts; provide transportation solutions that avoid disruption to neighborhoods, commercial districts, and historic areas; provide cost-effective and achievable transportation solutions for the corridor; and serve a diverse population within the study area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Though little land would be taken, rights-of-way development within the densely developed corridor would result in the displacement of numerous residences, businesses, religious organizations, government offices, and historic structures. Four districts eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. Though no rights-of-way would be required from parks or recreation areas, indirect impacts, primarily consisting of visual intrusions, would be numerous and significant. The project would traverse an area in violation of federal standards for ozone levels, though, as mentioned above, the project should benefit air quality in the corridor. Noise levels could affect up to 133 sensitive receptors. LRT operations would cause vibration impacts to some residences. Construction workers could encounter up to 285 hazardous waste sites. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 07-0284D, Volume 31, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100020, Volume 1--788 pages, Volume 2--342 pages, Volume 3--112 pages, January 21, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - Texas KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16396273?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.title=UNIVERSITY+CORRIDOR+FIXED+GUIDEWAY+IN+HOUSTON%2C+HARRIS+COUNTY%2C+TEXAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Fort Worth, Texas; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 21, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - The Clarus regional demonstration T2 - 90th Annual Meeting of the American Meteorological Society AN - 742795194; 5678561 JF - 90th Annual Meeting of the American Meteorological Society AU - Pisano, Paul AU - McKeever, B AU - Klein, F Y1 - 2010/01/17/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Jan 17 KW - U 4300:Environmental Science UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/742795194?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=90th+Annual+Meeting+of+the+American+Meteorological+Society&rft.atitle=The+Clarus+regional+demonstration&rft.au=Pisano%2C+Paul%3BMcKeever%2C+B%3BKlein%2C+F&rft.aulast=Pisano&rft.aufirst=Paul&rft.date=2010-01-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=90th+Annual+Meeting+of+the+American+Meteorological+Society&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://ams.confex.com/ams/90annual/techprogram/MEETING.HTM LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-05-17 N1 - Last updated - 2010-08-14 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Federal Aviation Administration Examination of Space Weather in support of Aviation T2 - 90th Annual Meeting of the American Meteorological Society AN - 742793944; 5677684 JF - 90th Annual Meeting of the American Meteorological Society AU - Albersheim, Steven AU - Gunzelman, M Y1 - 2010/01/17/ PY - 2010 DA - 2010 Jan 17 KW - Weather KW - U 4300:Environmental Science UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/742793944?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=90th+Annual+Meeting+of+the+American+Meteorological+Society&rft.atitle=Federal+Aviation+Administration+Examination+of+Space+Weather+in+support+of+Aviation&rft.au=Albersheim%2C+Steven%3BGunzelman%2C+M&rft.aulast=Albersheim&rft.aufirst=Steven&rft.date=2010-01-17&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=90th+Annual+Meeting+of+the+American+Meteorological+Society&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://ams.confex.com/ams/90annual/techprogram/MEETING.HTM LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-05-17 N1 - Last updated - 2010-08-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 37 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873131818; 14141-4_0037 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131818?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Child+Health+Care&rft.atitle=Transition%3A+Inevitable%2C+special%2C+extraordinary%2C+and+uncertain&rft.au=Carter%2C+Bernie&rft.aulast=Carter&rft.aufirst=Bernie&rft.date=2015-09-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=277&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Child+Health+Care&rft.issn=13674935&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177%2F1367493515603537 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 36 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873131806; 14141-4_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131806?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 40 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130386; 14141-4_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130386?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 39 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130360; 14141-4_0039 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130360?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 38 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130336; 14141-4_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130336?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 23 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130294; 14141-4_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130294?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 22 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130242; 14141-4_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130242?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 14 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130229; 14141-4_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130229?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2015-09-01&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=362&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Polish+Psychological+Bulletin&rft.issn=00792993&rft_id=info:doi/10.1515%2Fppb-2015-0043 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 10 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130219; 14141-4_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130219?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 6 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130201; 14141-4_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130201?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 31 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130154; 14141-4_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130154?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 30 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130137; 14141-4_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130137?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 4 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130135; 14141-4_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130135?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 1 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130122; 14141-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130122?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 21 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130082; 14141-4_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130082?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Frontiers+in+Psychology&rft.atitle=Boundaryless+career+and+career+success%3A+The+impact+of+emotional+and+social+competencies&rft.au=Gerli%2C+Fabrizio%3BBonesso%2C+Sara%3BPizzi%2C+Claudio&rft.aulast=Gerli&rft.aufirst=Fabrizio&rft.date=2015-09-01&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Frontiers+in+Psychology&rft.issn=1664-1078&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 13 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130070; 14141-4_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130070?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 12 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130053; 14141-4_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130053?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 7 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873130002; 14141-4_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130002?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Management+Learning&rft.atitle=The+influence+of+senior+leaders+on+organisational+learning%3A+Insights+from+the+employees%E2%80%99+perspective&rft.au=Waddell%2C+Alex%3BPio%2C+Edwina&rft.aulast=Waddell&rft.aufirst=Alex&rft.date=2015-09-01&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=461&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Management+Learning&rft.issn=13505076&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177%2F1350507614541201 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 26 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873129733; 14141-4_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129733?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 18 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873129707; 14141-4_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129707?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 17 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873129678; 14141-4_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129678?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 8 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873129650; 14141-4_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129650?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=Gurvinder&rft.date=2015-09-01&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=463&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=International+Review+of+Psychiatry&rft.issn=09540261&rft_id=info:doi/10.3109%2F09540261.2015.1094032 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 28 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128386; 14141-4_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128386?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 27 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128373; 14141-4_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128373?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 20 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128367; 14141-4_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128367?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 29 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128363; 14141-4_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128363?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 19 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128358; 14141-4_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128358?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 3 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128352; 14141-4_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128352?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 25 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128288; 14141-4_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128288?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 24 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128277; 14141-4_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128277?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 15 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128245; 14141-4_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128245?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=David&rft.date=2015-09-01&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=656&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Estudios+de+Psicolog%C3%ADa&rft.issn=02109395&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080%2F02109395.2015.1078554 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 9 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128236; 14141-4_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128236?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 34 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128027; 14141-4_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128027?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 33 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128023; 14141-4_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128023?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 32 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873128020; 14141-4_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128020?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 35 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873127594; 14141-4_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127594?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). [Part 2 of 41] T2 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 873126871; 14141-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873126871?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UPPER LAS VEGAS WASH CONSERVATION TRANSFER AREA, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2004). [Part 3 of 3] T2 - UPPER LAS VEGAS WASH CONSERVATION TRANSFER AREA, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2004). AN - 756826854; 14136-100009_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Boundary adjustments to the Upper Las Vegas Wash Conservation Transfer Area (CTA), Clark County, Nevada are proposed. The county encompasses the greater Las Vegas metropolitan area, one of the fastest growing urban areas in the US, and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) was authorized by legislation in 1998 and 2002 to dispose of federal lands to address the continuing growth. The CTA alternative referenced in the final Las Vegas Valley Disposal Boundary EIS of December 2004 allowed for the disposal of 46,700 acres of land in the Las Vegas Valley, but specified additional analysis of 5,000 acres to be withheld from sale because of their high concentration of sensitive resources. The CTA study area was subsequently expanded to 13,622 acres. Within the final CTA boundary, a conservation strategy agreement would be developed to protect vegetation and unique paleontological and archaeological resources and habitat for special status species. This supplemental draft EIS describes and analyzes possible boundary adjustments for the Upper Las Vegas Wash CTA. The study area is located within a broad, northwest-southeast-trending alluvial basin, and the Las Vegas Wash is a heavily incised natural flood channel that carries storm water and runoff from Las Vegas to Lake Mead. Three rare plant species and a number of protected wildlife species occur within the area and it contains large numbers of paleontological sites, 660 acres of the Tule Springs archaeological site, and the 300-acre Eglington Preserve. Six alternative CTA boundaries, ranging from 1,500 acres for the No Action Alternative, to almost 13,000 acres for Alternative A, are analyzed. Under Alternative B, which is the preferred alternative, a boundary of 11,008 acres would include fossil formations, sensitive cultural and plant resources, active wash and 100-year floodplain, and the adjacent upper alluvial fan. Alternative B would include the Eglington Preserve, but not the Tule Springs lands. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A final boundary based on best science would ensure the natural functioning of the Upper Las Vegas Wash, including adjacent alluvial fans, while allowing for compatible development or uses. The sensitive botanical, cultural, and paleontological resources in the CTA would be protected. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Increased erosion and sedimentation would occur as a result of increased land uses. Under the preferred alternative, private development on 2,315 acres would yield up to 1,440 tons of sediment loss annually as a result of surface erosion and up to 1,030 tons of stream bank erosion. Undeveloped landscapes would be converted to high-density urban development with consequent increases in ambient noise. There would be potential for exposure and destruction of undocumented fossil localities. LEGAL MANDATES: Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), and Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and final EISs, see 05-0255D, Volume 29, Number 2 and 05-0432F, Volume 29, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100009, Draft Supplemental EIS--316 pages and maps, Appendices--377 pages and maps, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: DES 10-01, BLM/NV/EL/ES-10/06+1793 KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Cultural Resources KW - Desert Land KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Floodplains KW - Historic Sites KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Land Management KW - Open Space KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Property Disposition KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Las Vegas Resource Management Area KW - Nevada KW - Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, Compliance KW - Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Compliance KW - Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826854?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UPPER+LAS+VEGAS+WASH+CONSERVATION+TRANSFER+AREA%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2004%29.&rft.title=UPPER+LAS+VEGAS+WASH+CONSERVATION+TRANSFER+AREA%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Las Vegas, Nevada; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UPPER LAS VEGAS WASH CONSERVATION TRANSFER AREA, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2004). [Part 2 of 3] T2 - UPPER LAS VEGAS WASH CONSERVATION TRANSFER AREA, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2004). AN - 756826846; 14136-100009_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Boundary adjustments to the Upper Las Vegas Wash Conservation Transfer Area (CTA), Clark County, Nevada are proposed. The county encompasses the greater Las Vegas metropolitan area, one of the fastest growing urban areas in the US, and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) was authorized by legislation in 1998 and 2002 to dispose of federal lands to address the continuing growth. The CTA alternative referenced in the final Las Vegas Valley Disposal Boundary EIS of December 2004 allowed for the disposal of 46,700 acres of land in the Las Vegas Valley, but specified additional analysis of 5,000 acres to be withheld from sale because of their high concentration of sensitive resources. The CTA study area was subsequently expanded to 13,622 acres. Within the final CTA boundary, a conservation strategy agreement would be developed to protect vegetation and unique paleontological and archaeological resources and habitat for special status species. This supplemental draft EIS describes and analyzes possible boundary adjustments for the Upper Las Vegas Wash CTA. The study area is located within a broad, northwest-southeast-trending alluvial basin, and the Las Vegas Wash is a heavily incised natural flood channel that carries storm water and runoff from Las Vegas to Lake Mead. Three rare plant species and a number of protected wildlife species occur within the area and it contains large numbers of paleontological sites, 660 acres of the Tule Springs archaeological site, and the 300-acre Eglington Preserve. Six alternative CTA boundaries, ranging from 1,500 acres for the No Action Alternative, to almost 13,000 acres for Alternative A, are analyzed. Under Alternative B, which is the preferred alternative, a boundary of 11,008 acres would include fossil formations, sensitive cultural and plant resources, active wash and 100-year floodplain, and the adjacent upper alluvial fan. Alternative B would include the Eglington Preserve, but not the Tule Springs lands. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A final boundary based on best science would ensure the natural functioning of the Upper Las Vegas Wash, including adjacent alluvial fans, while allowing for compatible development or uses. The sensitive botanical, cultural, and paleontological resources in the CTA would be protected. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Increased erosion and sedimentation would occur as a result of increased land uses. Under the preferred alternative, private development on 2,315 acres would yield up to 1,440 tons of sediment loss annually as a result of surface erosion and up to 1,030 tons of stream bank erosion. Undeveloped landscapes would be converted to high-density urban development with consequent increases in ambient noise. There would be potential for exposure and destruction of undocumented fossil localities. LEGAL MANDATES: Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), and Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and final EISs, see 05-0255D, Volume 29, Number 2 and 05-0432F, Volume 29, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100009, Draft Supplemental EIS--316 pages and maps, Appendices--377 pages and maps, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: DES 10-01, BLM/NV/EL/ES-10/06+1793 KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Cultural Resources KW - Desert Land KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Floodplains KW - Historic Sites KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Land Management KW - Open Space KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Property Disposition KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Las Vegas Resource Management Area KW - Nevada KW - Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, Compliance KW - Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Compliance KW - Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826846?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UPPER+LAS+VEGAS+WASH+CONSERVATION+TRANSFER+AREA%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2004%29.&rft.title=UPPER+LAS+VEGAS+WASH+CONSERVATION+TRANSFER+AREA%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Las Vegas, Nevada; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UPPER LAS VEGAS WASH CONSERVATION TRANSFER AREA, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2004). [Part 1 of 3] T2 - UPPER LAS VEGAS WASH CONSERVATION TRANSFER AREA, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2004). AN - 756826540; 14136-100009_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Boundary adjustments to the Upper Las Vegas Wash Conservation Transfer Area (CTA), Clark County, Nevada are proposed. The county encompasses the greater Las Vegas metropolitan area, one of the fastest growing urban areas in the US, and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) was authorized by legislation in 1998 and 2002 to dispose of federal lands to address the continuing growth. The CTA alternative referenced in the final Las Vegas Valley Disposal Boundary EIS of December 2004 allowed for the disposal of 46,700 acres of land in the Las Vegas Valley, but specified additional analysis of 5,000 acres to be withheld from sale because of their high concentration of sensitive resources. The CTA study area was subsequently expanded to 13,622 acres. Within the final CTA boundary, a conservation strategy agreement would be developed to protect vegetation and unique paleontological and archaeological resources and habitat for special status species. This supplemental draft EIS describes and analyzes possible boundary adjustments for the Upper Las Vegas Wash CTA. The study area is located within a broad, northwest-southeast-trending alluvial basin, and the Las Vegas Wash is a heavily incised natural flood channel that carries storm water and runoff from Las Vegas to Lake Mead. Three rare plant species and a number of protected wildlife species occur within the area and it contains large numbers of paleontological sites, 660 acres of the Tule Springs archaeological site, and the 300-acre Eglington Preserve. Six alternative CTA boundaries, ranging from 1,500 acres for the No Action Alternative, to almost 13,000 acres for Alternative A, are analyzed. Under Alternative B, which is the preferred alternative, a boundary of 11,008 acres would include fossil formations, sensitive cultural and plant resources, active wash and 100-year floodplain, and the adjacent upper alluvial fan. Alternative B would include the Eglington Preserve, but not the Tule Springs lands. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A final boundary based on best science would ensure the natural functioning of the Upper Las Vegas Wash, including adjacent alluvial fans, while allowing for compatible development or uses. The sensitive botanical, cultural, and paleontological resources in the CTA would be protected. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Increased erosion and sedimentation would occur as a result of increased land uses. Under the preferred alternative, private development on 2,315 acres would yield up to 1,440 tons of sediment loss annually as a result of surface erosion and up to 1,030 tons of stream bank erosion. Undeveloped landscapes would be converted to high-density urban development with consequent increases in ambient noise. There would be potential for exposure and destruction of undocumented fossil localities. LEGAL MANDATES: Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), and Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and final EISs, see 05-0255D, Volume 29, Number 2 and 05-0432F, Volume 29, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100009, Draft Supplemental EIS--316 pages and maps, Appendices--377 pages and maps, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: DES 10-01, BLM/NV/EL/ES-10/06+1793 KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Cultural Resources KW - Desert Land KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Floodplains KW - Historic Sites KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Land Management KW - Open Space KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Property Disposition KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Las Vegas Resource Management Area KW - Nevada KW - Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, Compliance KW - Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Compliance KW - Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826540?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UPPER+LAS+VEGAS+WASH+CONSERVATION+TRANSFER+AREA%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2004%29.&rft.title=UPPER+LAS+VEGAS+WASH+CONSERVATION+TRANSFER+AREA%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Las Vegas, Nevada; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - STATE ROUTE 520, INTERSTATE 5 TO MEDINA: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND HOV PROJECT, LAKE WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF AUGUST 2006). AN - 754908746; 14141 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges carrying State Route (SR) 520 across Lake Washington, and the improvement of the existing roadway between Seattle and Medina, King County, Washington are proposed. The 5.2-mile project corridor extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle to Evergreen Point Road in Medina. Currently, the Portage Bay and Evergreen Point bridges are vulnerable to earthquake damage due to structural designs that include hollow supporting columns and the manner in which these columns are connected to the main crossing structures of the bridges. The floating portion of Evergreen Point Bridge is susceptible to damage by high winds; storms over the years have required many bridge closures and the bridge is riding a foot lower in the water than when it first opened. Both structures are at high risk of failure over the next 20 years. In addition, as one of the two main east-west routes across Lake Washington, SR 520 is vital to the regional economy. A No Build Alternative and two build alternatives, the four-lane alternative and the six-lane alternative, were evaluated in the draft EIS of August 2006. This supplemental draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three design options for the six-lane alternative. The build alternative would replace the existing roadway and bridges with new facilities that would each provide two general-purpose lanes and a continuous high-occupancy vehicle lane in each direction and include three landscaped lids over SR 520 to reconnect neighborhoods that are now separated by the highway. Additionally, a 14-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian path along the north side of SR 520 through the Montlake area and across the Evergreen Point Bridge would connect to the existing Bill Dawson Trail near the eastern shore of Portage Bay. Tolling on SR 520 would be completely automated. Three options for the six-lane alternative would result in different designs for the Montlake interchange. Construction would begin in 2012 and a new Evergreen Point Bridge would be expected to open to traffic in 2014. If fully funded, the balance of the project would be completed in 2018. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new bridges would improve structural resistance to earthquakes, while the new roadways would have wider shoulders to help reduce congestion by improving roadway operations and driver safety. Commercial and recreational access and neighborhood cohesion along the route would be significantly enhanced. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Bridge and approach construction and the associated rights-of-way expansions would require five to seven full parcel acquisitions and result in the displacement of wetlands, vegetation and the associated wildlife habitat, and lake benthic habitat. The bridges would be subject to seismic activity, though, as indicated, the structures would be more capable of withstanding an earthquake. Parking spaces would be displaced. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards at numerous sensitive receptor sites along the corridor. Historic, archaeological, and recreational sites would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0582D, Volume 30, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100014, Executive Summary--66 pages, Supplemental Draft EIS--873 pages and CD -ROM, Technical Appendices--CD-ROM, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WA-EIS-06-02-DS KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Earthquakes KW - Geologic Assessments KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Lakes KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parking KW - Recreation Resources KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils Surveys KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Lake Washington KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 9 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908746?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.title=STATE+ROUTE+520%2C+INTERSTATE+5+TO+MEDINA%3A+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+AND+HOV+PROJECT%2C+LAKE+WASHINGTON%2C+SEATTLE%2C+KING+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+AUGUST+2006%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Olympia, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - UPPER LAS VEGAS WASH CONSERVATION TRANSFER AREA, CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF DECEMBER 2004). AN - 754908415; 14136 AB - PURPOSE: Boundary adjustments to the Upper Las Vegas Wash Conservation Transfer Area (CTA), Clark County, Nevada are proposed. The county encompasses the greater Las Vegas metropolitan area, one of the fastest growing urban areas in the US, and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) was authorized by legislation in 1998 and 2002 to dispose of federal lands to address the continuing growth. The CTA alternative referenced in the final Las Vegas Valley Disposal Boundary EIS of December 2004 allowed for the disposal of 46,700 acres of land in the Las Vegas Valley, but specified additional analysis of 5,000 acres to be withheld from sale because of their high concentration of sensitive resources. The CTA study area was subsequently expanded to 13,622 acres. Within the final CTA boundary, a conservation strategy agreement would be developed to protect vegetation and unique paleontological and archaeological resources and habitat for special status species. This supplemental draft EIS describes and analyzes possible boundary adjustments for the Upper Las Vegas Wash CTA. The study area is located within a broad, northwest-southeast-trending alluvial basin, and the Las Vegas Wash is a heavily incised natural flood channel that carries storm water and runoff from Las Vegas to Lake Mead. Three rare plant species and a number of protected wildlife species occur within the area and it contains large numbers of paleontological sites, 660 acres of the Tule Springs archaeological site, and the 300-acre Eglington Preserve. Six alternative CTA boundaries, ranging from 1,500 acres for the No Action Alternative, to almost 13,000 acres for Alternative A, are analyzed. Under Alternative B, which is the preferred alternative, a boundary of 11,008 acres would include fossil formations, sensitive cultural and plant resources, active wash and 100-year floodplain, and the adjacent upper alluvial fan. Alternative B would include the Eglington Preserve, but not the Tule Springs lands. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A final boundary based on best science would ensure the natural functioning of the Upper Las Vegas Wash, including adjacent alluvial fans, while allowing for compatible development or uses. The sensitive botanical, cultural, and paleontological resources in the CTA would be protected. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Increased erosion and sedimentation would occur as a result of increased land uses. Under the preferred alternative, private development on 2,315 acres would yield up to 1,440 tons of sediment loss annually as a result of surface erosion and up to 1,030 tons of stream bank erosion. Undeveloped landscapes would be converted to high-density urban development with consequent increases in ambient noise. There would be potential for exposure and destruction of undocumented fossil localities. LEGAL MANDATES: Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), and Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft and final EISs, see 05-0255D, Volume 29, Number 2 and 05-0432F, Volume 29, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 100009, Draft Supplemental EIS--316 pages and maps, Appendices--377 pages and maps, January 14, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: DES 10-01, BLM/NV/EL/ES-10/06+1793 KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Conservation KW - Cultural Resources KW - Desert Land KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Erosion KW - Floodplains KW - Historic Sites KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Land Management KW - Open Space KW - Paleontological Sites KW - Property Disposition KW - Recreation Resources KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Resources KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Las Vegas Resource Management Area KW - Nevada KW - Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, Compliance KW - Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, Compliance KW - Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908415?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=UPPER+LAS+VEGAS+WASH+CONSERVATION+TRANSFER+AREA%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2004%29.&rft.title=UPPER+LAS+VEGAS+WASH+CONSERVATION+TRANSFER+AREA%2C+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+NEVADA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+DECEMBER+2004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Las Vegas, Nevada; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 14, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. [Part 2 of 4] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. AN - 756827012; 14132-100005_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of State Road 23 (SR 23) between the cities of Fond du Lac and Plymouth in Fond du Lac and Sheboygan counties, Wisconsin is proposed. The study corridor begins at US 151 Fond du Lac Bypass, and extends approximately 19 miles eastward to County Road P in Sheboygan County. The existing SR 23 two-lane roadway has 1.3 miles of adequate concrete pavement and 17.3 miles of bituminous pavement that is exhibiting signs of distress. Six build alternatives following three alignments and a No Build alternative were considered in the draft EIS of November 2004. This supplemental draft EIS addresses new build alternative components and corridor preservation alternatives that have been developed in the interim. The preferred build alternative (Alternative 1) would involve construction of a full four-lane divided highway on the existing alignment for the full length of the project. From US 151 to County Road UU, a suburban cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and an 18-foot median with mountable curb. From County Road UU east to County Road P, an expressway cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and a 60-foot median. An extension of the Old Plank Trail would be constructed from the town of Greenbush to the Prairie Trail in Fond du Lac. A series of local roads and interchanges would be constructed to improve highway mobility and safety. The preferred alternative would implement corridor preservation at key intersections on SR 23 for future interchanges and overpasses. Two corridor preservation alternatives and a No Corridor preservation alternative for the US 151/SR 23 Interchange are also considered. Estimated construction costs in 2008 dollars for the preferred build alternative, the connection roads and interchanges, and the Old Plank Trail are $98.6 million, $18.0 million, and $6.7 million, respectively. Corridor preservation costs for SR 23 are estimated at $49.0 million. Corridor preservation cost estimates for US 151/SR 23 range from $50.3 million to $71.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would preserve the corridor for future transportation needs and provide safe and efficient transportation between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan to serve present and long-term traffic needs. The new facility would provide additional capacity within the corridor, enhancing community mobility and supporting economic development in east-central Wisconsin. The system link between the backbone routes US 41 and Interstate 43 would be completed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require of 212 acres of land and would result in the displacement of 14 residences, one businesses, 14 farms, and 32 acres of wetlands. The connection roads and interchanges component of the project would require 97 acres of right-of-way and would displace nine residences, and four businesses. The Old Plank Trail component of the project would require 102 acres of new right-of-way and would displace 12 acres of wetlands. The corridor preservation alternatives would require additional acreage at the time transportation improvements are implemented. The project would affect habitat for federal protected species and encroach on flood plans. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0395D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100005, Supplemental Draft EIS--157 pages and maps, Appendices--178 pages and maps, January 11, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-04-03-SD KW - Demography KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756827012?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 11, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. [Part 1 of 4] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. AN - 756826919; 14132-100005_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of State Road 23 (SR 23) between the cities of Fond du Lac and Plymouth in Fond du Lac and Sheboygan counties, Wisconsin is proposed. The study corridor begins at US 151 Fond du Lac Bypass, and extends approximately 19 miles eastward to County Road P in Sheboygan County. The existing SR 23 two-lane roadway has 1.3 miles of adequate concrete pavement and 17.3 miles of bituminous pavement that is exhibiting signs of distress. Six build alternatives following three alignments and a No Build alternative were considered in the draft EIS of November 2004. This supplemental draft EIS addresses new build alternative components and corridor preservation alternatives that have been developed in the interim. The preferred build alternative (Alternative 1) would involve construction of a full four-lane divided highway on the existing alignment for the full length of the project. From US 151 to County Road UU, a suburban cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and an 18-foot median with mountable curb. From County Road UU east to County Road P, an expressway cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and a 60-foot median. An extension of the Old Plank Trail would be constructed from the town of Greenbush to the Prairie Trail in Fond du Lac. A series of local roads and interchanges would be constructed to improve highway mobility and safety. The preferred alternative would implement corridor preservation at key intersections on SR 23 for future interchanges and overpasses. Two corridor preservation alternatives and a No Corridor preservation alternative for the US 151/SR 23 Interchange are also considered. Estimated construction costs in 2008 dollars for the preferred build alternative, the connection roads and interchanges, and the Old Plank Trail are $98.6 million, $18.0 million, and $6.7 million, respectively. Corridor preservation costs for SR 23 are estimated at $49.0 million. Corridor preservation cost estimates for US 151/SR 23 range from $50.3 million to $71.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would preserve the corridor for future transportation needs and provide safe and efficient transportation between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan to serve present and long-term traffic needs. The new facility would provide additional capacity within the corridor, enhancing community mobility and supporting economic development in east-central Wisconsin. The system link between the backbone routes US 41 and Interstate 43 would be completed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require of 212 acres of land and would result in the displacement of 14 residences, one businesses, 14 farms, and 32 acres of wetlands. The connection roads and interchanges component of the project would require 97 acres of right-of-way and would displace nine residences, and four businesses. The Old Plank Trail component of the project would require 102 acres of new right-of-way and would displace 12 acres of wetlands. The corridor preservation alternatives would require additional acreage at the time transportation improvements are implemented. The project would affect habitat for federal protected species and encroach on flood plans. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0395D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100005, Supplemental Draft EIS--157 pages and maps, Appendices--178 pages and maps, January 11, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-04-03-SD KW - Demography KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826919?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 11, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. [Part 4 of 4] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. AN - 756826534; 14132-100005_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of State Road 23 (SR 23) between the cities of Fond du Lac and Plymouth in Fond du Lac and Sheboygan counties, Wisconsin is proposed. The study corridor begins at US 151 Fond du Lac Bypass, and extends approximately 19 miles eastward to County Road P in Sheboygan County. The existing SR 23 two-lane roadway has 1.3 miles of adequate concrete pavement and 17.3 miles of bituminous pavement that is exhibiting signs of distress. Six build alternatives following three alignments and a No Build alternative were considered in the draft EIS of November 2004. This supplemental draft EIS addresses new build alternative components and corridor preservation alternatives that have been developed in the interim. The preferred build alternative (Alternative 1) would involve construction of a full four-lane divided highway on the existing alignment for the full length of the project. From US 151 to County Road UU, a suburban cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and an 18-foot median with mountable curb. From County Road UU east to County Road P, an expressway cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and a 60-foot median. An extension of the Old Plank Trail would be constructed from the town of Greenbush to the Prairie Trail in Fond du Lac. A series of local roads and interchanges would be constructed to improve highway mobility and safety. The preferred alternative would implement corridor preservation at key intersections on SR 23 for future interchanges and overpasses. Two corridor preservation alternatives and a No Corridor preservation alternative for the US 151/SR 23 Interchange are also considered. Estimated construction costs in 2008 dollars for the preferred build alternative, the connection roads and interchanges, and the Old Plank Trail are $98.6 million, $18.0 million, and $6.7 million, respectively. Corridor preservation costs for SR 23 are estimated at $49.0 million. Corridor preservation cost estimates for US 151/SR 23 range from $50.3 million to $71.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would preserve the corridor for future transportation needs and provide safe and efficient transportation between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan to serve present and long-term traffic needs. The new facility would provide additional capacity within the corridor, enhancing community mobility and supporting economic development in east-central Wisconsin. The system link between the backbone routes US 41 and Interstate 43 would be completed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require of 212 acres of land and would result in the displacement of 14 residences, one businesses, 14 farms, and 32 acres of wetlands. The connection roads and interchanges component of the project would require 97 acres of right-of-way and would displace nine residences, and four businesses. The Old Plank Trail component of the project would require 102 acres of new right-of-way and would displace 12 acres of wetlands. The corridor preservation alternatives would require additional acreage at the time transportation improvements are implemented. The project would affect habitat for federal protected species and encroach on flood plans. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0395D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100005, Supplemental Draft EIS--157 pages and maps, Appendices--178 pages and maps, January 11, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-04-03-SD KW - Demography KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826534?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 11, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. [Part 3 of 4] T2 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. AN - 756826514; 14132-100005_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of State Road 23 (SR 23) between the cities of Fond du Lac and Plymouth in Fond du Lac and Sheboygan counties, Wisconsin is proposed. The study corridor begins at US 151 Fond du Lac Bypass, and extends approximately 19 miles eastward to County Road P in Sheboygan County. The existing SR 23 two-lane roadway has 1.3 miles of adequate concrete pavement and 17.3 miles of bituminous pavement that is exhibiting signs of distress. Six build alternatives following three alignments and a No Build alternative were considered in the draft EIS of November 2004. This supplemental draft EIS addresses new build alternative components and corridor preservation alternatives that have been developed in the interim. The preferred build alternative (Alternative 1) would involve construction of a full four-lane divided highway on the existing alignment for the full length of the project. From US 151 to County Road UU, a suburban cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and an 18-foot median with mountable curb. From County Road UU east to County Road P, an expressway cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and a 60-foot median. An extension of the Old Plank Trail would be constructed from the town of Greenbush to the Prairie Trail in Fond du Lac. A series of local roads and interchanges would be constructed to improve highway mobility and safety. The preferred alternative would implement corridor preservation at key intersections on SR 23 for future interchanges and overpasses. Two corridor preservation alternatives and a No Corridor preservation alternative for the US 151/SR 23 Interchange are also considered. Estimated construction costs in 2008 dollars for the preferred build alternative, the connection roads and interchanges, and the Old Plank Trail are $98.6 million, $18.0 million, and $6.7 million, respectively. Corridor preservation costs for SR 23 are estimated at $49.0 million. Corridor preservation cost estimates for US 151/SR 23 range from $50.3 million to $71.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would preserve the corridor for future transportation needs and provide safe and efficient transportation between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan to serve present and long-term traffic needs. The new facility would provide additional capacity within the corridor, enhancing community mobility and supporting economic development in east-central Wisconsin. The system link between the backbone routes US 41 and Interstate 43 would be completed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require of 212 acres of land and would result in the displacement of 14 residences, one businesses, 14 farms, and 32 acres of wetlands. The connection roads and interchanges component of the project would require 97 acres of right-of-way and would displace nine residences, and four businesses. The Old Plank Trail component of the project would require 102 acres of new right-of-way and would displace 12 acres of wetlands. The corridor preservation alternatives would require additional acreage at the time transportation improvements are implemented. The project would affect habitat for federal protected species and encroach on flood plans. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0395D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100005, Supplemental Draft EIS--157 pages and maps, Appendices--178 pages and maps, January 11, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-04-03-SD KW - Demography KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/756826514?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=WISCONSIN+STATE+HIGHWAY+23%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+TO+PLYMOUTH%2C+FOND+DU+LAC+AND+SHEBOYGAN+COUNTIES%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 11, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WISCONSIN STATE HIGHWAY 23, FOND DU LAC TO PLYMOUTH, FOND DU LAC AND SHEBOYGAN COUNTIES, WISCONSIN. AN - 16381920; 14132 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of State Road 23 (SR 23) between the cities of Fond du Lac and Plymouth in Fond du Lac and Sheboygan counties, Wisconsin is proposed. The study corridor begins at US 151 Fond du Lac Bypass, and extends approximately 19 miles eastward to County Road P in Sheboygan County. The existing SR 23 two-lane roadway has 1.3 miles of adequate concrete pavement and 17.3 miles of bituminous pavement that is exhibiting signs of distress. Six build alternatives following three alignments and a No Build alternative were considered in the draft EIS of November 2004. This supplemental draft EIS addresses new build alternative components and corridor preservation alternatives that have been developed in the interim. The preferred build alternative (Alternative 1) would involve construction of a full four-lane divided highway on the existing alignment for the full length of the project. From US 151 to County Road UU, a suburban cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and an 18-foot median with mountable curb. From County Road UU east to County Road P, an expressway cross section would include four 12-foot lanes, 6-foot inside shoulders, 10-foot outside shoulders, and a 60-foot median. An extension of the Old Plank Trail would be constructed from the town of Greenbush to the Prairie Trail in Fond du Lac. A series of local roads and interchanges would be constructed to improve highway mobility and safety. The preferred alternative would implement corridor preservation at key intersections on SR 23 for future interchanges and overpasses. Two corridor preservation alternatives and a No Corridor preservation alternative for the US 151/SR 23 Interchange are also considered. Estimated construction costs in 2008 dollars for the preferred build alternative, the connection roads and interchanges, and the Old Plank Trail are $98.6 million, $18.0 million, and $6.7 million, respectively. Corridor preservation costs for SR 23 are estimated at $49.0 million. Corridor preservation cost estimates for US 151/SR 23 range from $50.3 million to $71.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would preserve the corridor for future transportation needs and provide safe and efficient transportation between Fond du Lac and Sheboygan to serve present and long-term traffic needs. The new facility would provide additional capacity within the corridor, enhancing community mobility and supporting economic development in east-central Wisconsin. The system link between the backbone routes US 41 and Interstate 43 would be completed. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require of 212 acres of land and would result in the displacement of 14 residences, one businesses, 14 farms, and 32 acres of wetlands. The connection roads and interchanges component of the project would require 97 acres of right-of-way and would displace nine residences, and four businesses. The Old Plank Trail component of the project would require 102 acres of new right-of-way and would displace 12 acres of wetlands. The corridor preservation alternatives would require additional acreage at the time transportation improvements are implemented. The project would affect habitat for federal protected species and encroach on flood plans. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 05-0395D, Volume 29, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100005, Supplemental Draft EIS--157 pages and maps, Appendices--178 pages and maps, January 11, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WI-EIS-04-03-SD KW - Demography KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Relocation Plans KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wisconsin KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16381920?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Australasian+Journal+of+Organisational+Psychology&rft.atitle=Assessing+emotional+intelligence+in+leaders+and+organisations%3A+Reliability+and+validity+of+the+Emotional+Capital+Report+%28ECR%29&rft.au=Newman%2C+Martyn%3BPurse%2C+Judith%3BSmith%2C+Ken%3BBroderick%2C+John&rft.aulast=Newman&rft.aufirst=Martyn&rft.date=2015-08-18&rft.volume=8&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Australasian+Journal+of+Organisational+Psychology&rft.issn=2054-2232&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017%2Forp.2015.5 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Madison, Wisconsin; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 11, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 11 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876254727; 14162-3_0011 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254727?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 10 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876254725; 14162-3_0010 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254725?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 9 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876254724; 14162-3_0009 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 9 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254724?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 8 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876254722; 14162-3_0008 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254722?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 2 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876254445; 14162-3_0002 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254445?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 1 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876254438; 14162-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254438?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 23 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876254418; 14162-3_0023 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254418?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 22 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876254417; 14162-3_0022 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254417?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 21 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876254314; 14162-3_0021 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876254314?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 20 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252241; 14162-3_0020 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252241?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 19 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252240; 14162-3_0019 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 19 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252240?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 28 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252215; 14162-3_0028 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252215?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 27 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252211; 14162-3_0027 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252211?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=Shane&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=485&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=The+Leadership+Quarterly&rft.issn=10489843&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.leaqua.2015.07.002 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 26 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252207; 14162-3_0026 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252207?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 25 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252204; 14162-3_0025 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252204?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 24 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876252199; 14162-3_0024 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876252199?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=unknown&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.+%5BPart+24+of+28%5D&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=376&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Advances+in+Developing+Human+Resources&rft.issn=15234223&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177%2F1523422315587905 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 18 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876251787; 14162-3_0018 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251787?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 15 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876251786; 14162-3_0015 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876251786?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 14 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876250998; 14162-3_0014 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876250998?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Western+Journal+of+Communication&rft.atitle=Personal%2C+cognitive%2C+and+emotive+antecedents+of+consumers%27+choices+regarding+complaint+messages&rft.au=Bolkan%2C+San%3BGoodboy%2C+Alan+K.&rft.aulast=Bolkan&rft.aufirst=San&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=79&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=413&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Western+Journal+of+Communication&rft.issn=10570314&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080%2F10570314.2015.1066029 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 13 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876250997; 14162-3_0013 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876250997?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 12 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876250996; 14162-3_0012 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876250996?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 7 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876250995; 14162-3_0007 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876250995?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Gender+%26+Society&rft.atitle=The+gendering+of+emotional+flexibility%3A+Why+angry+women+are+both+admired+and+devalued+in+debt+settlement+firms&rft.au=Tufail%2C+Zaibu%3BPolletta%2C+Francesca&rft.aulast=Tufail&rft.aufirst=Zaibu&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=484&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Gender+%26+Society&rft.issn=08912432&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177%2F0891243215569050 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 6 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876250994; 14162-3_0006 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876250994?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 5 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876250993; 14162-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876250993?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 4 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876250991; 14162-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876250991?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 3 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876250990; 14162-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876250990?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 17 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876244668; 14162-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876244668?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. [Part 16 of 28] T2 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 876244653; 14162-3_0016 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/876244653?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GRAND FORKS AIR FORCE BASE PROJECT, BEDDOWN AND FLIGHT OPERATIONS OF REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT, BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE (BRAC), NORTH DAKOTA. AN - 754908467; 14162 AB - PURPOSE: New facility construction, infrastructure upgrades, and airspace changes to support remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) missions at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB), North Dakota are proposed. The 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission directives included realignment of Grand Forks AFB to facilitate an efficient and cost effective beddown of unmanned aircraft systems. Grand Forks AFB is home to the 319th Air Refueling Wing and comprises 5,422 acres in a predominantly agricultural area adjacent to Emerado and 15 miles west of Grand Forks near the North Dakota-Minnesota border. The current airspace structure around Grand Forks AFB does not provide the restricted area (RA) necessary to permit the planned family of RPA vehicles to operate and train. The two types of RPA proposed to beddown, the Global Hawk and the Predator, have the capability for split-site operations using two flight control stations. These assets would train in special use airspace and utilize restricted area R-5401/Camp Grafton South. The proposed action would modify airspace structure around the installation, in the existing military operations areas, and within North Dakota as necessary to permit the proposed RPA operations and training. Ground-based improvements would occur at Grand Forks AFB, with some laser target placements at R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Air operations at Grand Forks AFB would have split site capability for RPA operation from multiple locations including Grand Forks AFB, Hector International Airport in Fargo, and Creech AFB, Nevada. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this draft EIS. Ground-based improvements under Alternatives A, C, and D would include 22 proposed construction, demolition, repair, and renovation projects. Under Alternative B, Building 649 would be renovated and used to accommodate four Global Hawk aircraft and associated launch and recovery elements and the construction of a new RPA hangar would not be required. Under the proposed action, Alternative A, airspace for RPA training sorties, primarily Predators, would be provided by creating RA from the eastern portion of the Tiger and Devils Lake military operations areas above 6,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) and expanding the airspace above and around R-5401/Camp Grafton South. Stratified RAs would provide for two RPA transit corridors to link Grand Forks AFB to each of the proposed Tiger and Devils Lake RAs and a north-south RA transit corridor to link the Tiger and Devils Lake RAs. The primary difference between Alternative A and B is the assumption that a fixed wing Air Mobility Command mission would not occur and construction of the new RPA hangar would not be required. Alternative C includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes as described under Alternative A with the exception of the northern training area and the northwest and north-south transit corridors. Alternative D includes the same ground-based improvements, personnel and airspace changes proposed under Alternative A with the exception of the southern training area and the southwest transit corridor. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would meet BRAC 2005 directives by providing adequate training and operational assets that would support the maximum use of advanced surveillance technology. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Impacts to civil aircraft operations in regional airspace from proposed operations in new or expanded RAs could include civil aircraft ground hold, rescheduling, and/or rerouting. Grand Forks International Airport air traffic to the west would be required to re-route around the proposed airfield RA during scheduled activation which could add between 10 and 20 miles to their flight routes. LEGAL MANDATES: Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. JF - EPA number: 100003, Draft EIS--268 pages, Appendices--CD-ROM, January 8, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Demolition KW - Emissions KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Safety KW - Weapon Systems KW - Grand Forks AFB KW - North Dakota KW - Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754908467?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-08&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=GRAND+FORKS+AIR+FORCE+BASE+PROJECT%2C+BEDDOWN+AND+FLIGHT+OPERATIONS+OF+REMOTELY+PILOTED+AIRCRAFT%2C+BASE+REALIGNMENT+AND+CLOSURE+%28BRAC%29%2C+NORTH+DAKOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Illinois; AF N1 - Date revised - 2010-06-10 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 8, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Impact of longwall mining of coal on highways in southwestern Pennsylvania AN - 904457677; 2011-098947 AB - Underground longwall mining is a widely used coal extraction method in southwestern Pennsylvania, USA. The extracted coal takes the form of rectangular panels whose length and width can reach up to 4000 m and 450 m, respectively, with a thickness of roughly 2.0 m; mine depths range from 180 m to 280 m. A number of longwall panels have been mined underneath interstate highway I-79 in Greene County, Pennsylvania, inducing subsidence that raises concern for traffic safety. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation monitored the impact of mining on the highway and collected the data that formed the basis for this study. Field data obtained from eight longwall panels included time series of surveying measurements collected as each mine advanced underneath the highway. With the aid of a genetic algorithm, a three dimensional subsidence model was developed that described the data well. The model gives the spatial distribution of surface subsidence in terms of the depth of the coal, the width of panels, the thickness of extraction, and the location relative to the face of an advancing panel. Surface deformation features were analytically derived from the model. JF - IAHS-AISH Publication AU - Gutierrez, J J AU - Vallejo, L E AU - Lin, J S AU - Painter, R A2 - Carreon-Freyre, Dora C. A2 - Cerca, Mariano A2 - Galloway, Devin L. A2 - Silva-Corona, J. Jesus Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 120 EP - 125 PB - International Association of Hydrological Sciences VL - 339 SN - 0144-7815, 0144-7815 KW - United States KW - soil mechanics KW - mining KW - mines KW - embankments KW - genetic algorithms KW - underground mining KW - three-dimensional models KW - strain KW - engineering properties KW - Cumberland Mine KW - coal mines KW - subsidence KW - Emerald Mine KW - models KW - longwall mining KW - Greene County Pennsylvania KW - algorithms KW - Pennsylvania KW - roads KW - 30:Engineering geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/904457677?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=IAHS-AISH+Publication&rft.atitle=Impact+of+longwall+mining+of+coal+on+highways+in+southwestern+Pennsylvania&rft.au=Gutierrez%2C+J+J%3BVallejo%2C+L+E%3BLin%2C+J+S%3BPainter%2C+R&rft.aulast=Gutierrez&rft.aufirst=J&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=339&rft.issue=&rft.spage=120&rft.isbn=1907161124&rft.btitle=&rft.title=IAHS-AISH+Publication&rft.issn=01447815&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Eighth international symposium on Land subsidence; EISOLS N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 20 N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 1 table, sketch map N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - PIHSD9 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - algorithms; coal mines; Cumberland Mine; embankments; Emerald Mine; engineering properties; genetic algorithms; Greene County Pennsylvania; longwall mining; mines; mining; models; Pennsylvania; roads; soil mechanics; strain; subsidence; three-dimensional models; underground mining; United States ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Comprehensive Performance Evaluation Framework for Urban Transport Policies: Integration of Investment, Pricing, Regulation, and Subsidy Options AN - 869831276; 14582976 AB - This study describes a framework that is used to analyze urban transport policies in Kaohsiung, the second largest city in Taiwan. The framework is comprehensive in the sense that the full range of transport-related policy elements--investment, pricing, regulation, and subsidies--are explicitly integrated to generate policy alternatives for evaluation. In contrast, past planning processes have tended to focus solely on infrastructure investment. The relationships among these four policy elements were examined in the case study. The results show that an integrated, goal-related transport policy with the four elements is more effective than the traditional, single-element policy. The proposed policy evaluation framework can be implemented in the commonly used urban transportation planning process. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Chen, Y-W AU - Chiang, Y-S AU - Wei, C-H AD - Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, No. 1, Ta-Hsueh Road, Tainan 701, Taiwan Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 51 EP - 58 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2193 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE); Aerospace & High Technology Database (AH) KW - Pricing KW - Policies KW - Transportation KW - Performance evaluation KW - Financing KW - Transport KW - Urban transportation KW - Investment KW - Control UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/869831276?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Comprehensive+Performance+Evaluation+Framework+for+Urban+Transport+Policies%3A+Integration+of+Investment%2C+Pricing%2C+Regulation%2C+and+Subsidy+Options&rft.au=Chen%2C+Y-W%3BChiang%2C+Y-S%3BWei%2C+C-H&rft.aulast=Chen&rft.aufirst=Y-W&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=2193&rft.issue=&rft.spage=51&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2193-07 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-06-01 N1 - Last updated - 2014-04-08 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2193-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HELENA BYPASS PROJECT, FROM COUNTY ROAD 52 IN HELENA TO STATE ROUTE 261 NEAR BEARDEN ROAD, SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA (PROJECT NO. ST-059-261-004). [Part 1 of 2] T2 - HELENA BYPASS PROJECT, FROM COUNTY ROAD 52 IN HELENA TO STATE ROUTE 261 NEAR BEARDEN ROAD, SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA (PROJECT NO. ST-059-261-004). AN - 868224370; 14700-0_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a bypass of the City of Helena, Alabama, from County Road 52 (CR-52) to State Route 261 (SR-261), in northwestern Shelby County is proposed. Helena is located 15 miles from downtown Birmingham and Shelby County, as home to many suburban communities of metropolitan Birmingham, is the fastest growing county in the state. The historic district of Old Towne Helena currently experiences congestion problems, especially during the morning and evening rush hours. There are two active railroads with at-grade crossings of SR 261 in the Old Towne area which regularly cause delays and congestion. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The project would begin southwest of the downtown area on CR-52 approximately 6,600 feet west of the existing intersection of CR-52 and SR-261 and traverse northeasterly approximately four miles to a terminus with SR-261 near Bearden Road. The proposed facility would provide a four-lane divided highway link which would connect the planned widened SR 261 with CR 52. A five-lane section would be included for a portion of the bypass to accommodate tie-in to a planned five-lane section of SR-261. The alternative alignments range in length from 3.6 miles to 3.9 miles and would all include a hydraulic structure to cross Buck Creek, a tributary of the Cahaba River. Grade separated crossings for the two railroads would also be included. The total cost for the project is estimated at $22 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide some relief for the existing congested road network and the proposed project would serve as the transportation backbone for Helena's ongoing development. Travel times would be improved for all emergency services as well as local and through traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Short-term traffic disruption, soil erosion and sedimentation, air quality reduction, noise increases, and utilities disruptions could occur during the estimated 30 month construction period. Unavoidable impacts to wetlands would range from 0.1 acre to 1.7 acres. The bridge-crossing of Buck Creek would impact 800 feet of the 100-year floodplain. Under Alternative II and Alternative IIA, eight residences and three businesses would be displaced in the Starkey Street neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100430, 351 pages and maps, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-07-02-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224370?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HELENA+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+FROM+COUNTY+ROAD+52+IN+HELENA+TO+STATE+ROUTE+261+NEAR+BEARDEN+ROAD%2C+SHELBY+COUNTY%2C+ALABAMA+%28PROJECT+NO.+ST-059-261-004%29.&rft.title=HELENA+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+FROM+COUNTY+ROAD+52+IN+HELENA+TO+STATE+ROUTE+261+NEAR+BEARDEN+ROAD%2C+SHELBY+COUNTY%2C+ALABAMA+%28PROJECT+NO.+ST-059-261-004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HELENA BYPASS PROJECT, FROM COUNTY ROAD 52 IN HELENA TO STATE ROUTE 261 NEAR BEARDEN ROAD, SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA (PROJECT NO. ST-059-261-004). [Part 2 of 2] T2 - HELENA BYPASS PROJECT, FROM COUNTY ROAD 52 IN HELENA TO STATE ROUTE 261 NEAR BEARDEN ROAD, SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA (PROJECT NO. ST-059-261-004). AN - 868224143; 14700-0_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a bypass of the City of Helena, Alabama, from County Road 52 (CR-52) to State Route 261 (SR-261), in northwestern Shelby County is proposed. Helena is located 15 miles from downtown Birmingham and Shelby County, as home to many suburban communities of metropolitan Birmingham, is the fastest growing county in the state. The historic district of Old Towne Helena currently experiences congestion problems, especially during the morning and evening rush hours. There are two active railroads with at-grade crossings of SR 261 in the Old Towne area which regularly cause delays and congestion. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The project would begin southwest of the downtown area on CR-52 approximately 6,600 feet west of the existing intersection of CR-52 and SR-261 and traverse northeasterly approximately four miles to a terminus with SR-261 near Bearden Road. The proposed facility would provide a four-lane divided highway link which would connect the planned widened SR 261 with CR 52. A five-lane section would be included for a portion of the bypass to accommodate tie-in to a planned five-lane section of SR-261. The alternative alignments range in length from 3.6 miles to 3.9 miles and would all include a hydraulic structure to cross Buck Creek, a tributary of the Cahaba River. Grade separated crossings for the two railroads would also be included. The total cost for the project is estimated at $22 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide some relief for the existing congested road network and the proposed project would serve as the transportation backbone for Helena's ongoing development. Travel times would be improved for all emergency services as well as local and through traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Short-term traffic disruption, soil erosion and sedimentation, air quality reduction, noise increases, and utilities disruptions could occur during the estimated 30 month construction period. Unavoidable impacts to wetlands would range from 0.1 acre to 1.7 acres. The bridge-crossing of Buck Creek would impact 800 feet of the 100-year floodplain. Under Alternative II and Alternative IIA, eight residences and three businesses would be displaced in the Starkey Street neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100430, 351 pages and maps, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-07-02-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/868224143?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HELENA+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+FROM+COUNTY+ROAD+52+IN+HELENA+TO+STATE+ROUTE+261+NEAR+BEARDEN+ROAD%2C+SHELBY+COUNTY%2C+ALABAMA+%28PROJECT+NO.+ST-059-261-004%29.&rft.title=HELENA+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+FROM+COUNTY+ROAD+52+IN+HELENA+TO+STATE+ROUTE+261+NEAR+BEARDEN+ROAD%2C+SHELBY+COUNTY%2C+ALABAMA+%28PROJECT+NO.+ST-059-261-004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Cost, benefit, and value of bridge load testing AN - 855708231; 14144058 AB - Load testing is gaining popularity among bridge owners to take advantage of the actual load capacity that can not be estimated using conservative analyses. This paper provides an easy, generalized model for evaluating the value of load testing using costs and benefits of load tests. Both quantitative and qualitative benefits are included. Also explored are the effects of load tests on the life cycle analysis of bridges and quantification of extended life of bridges due to load testing. JF - Bridge Structures: Assessment, Design and Construction AU - Alampalli, S AU - Ettouney, M AD - New York State Department of Transportation, Albany, NY, USA Y1 - 2010///0, PY - 2010 DA - 0, 2010 SP - 121 EP - 127 PB - Taylor & Francis Group Ltd., 2 Park Square Oxford OX14 4RN UK VL - 6 IS - 3,4 SN - 1573-2487, 1573-2487 KW - ASFA 2: Ocean Technology Policy & Non-Living Resources; Aqualine Abstracts; Water Resources Abstracts KW - Load testing KW - cost-benefit modeling KW - load testing value KW - bridge testing KW - Testing Procedures KW - Bridge Construction KW - Bridges KW - Life cycle KW - Model Testing KW - Bridge Design KW - Costs KW - Assessments KW - Benefits KW - AQ 00007:Industrial Effluents KW - Q2 09381:Cables KW - SW 6010:Structures UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/855708231?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aaqualine&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Bridge+Structures%3A+Assessment%2C+Design+and+Construction&rft.atitle=Cost%2C+benefit%2C+and+value+of+bridge+load+testing&rft.au=Alampalli%2C+S%3BEttouney%2C+M&rft.aulast=Alampalli&rft.aufirst=S&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=3%2C4&rft.spage=121&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Bridge+Structures%3A+Assessment%2C+Design+and+Construction&rft.issn=15732487&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-10-12 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Bridges; Life cycle; Bridge Construction; Costs; Bridge Design; Testing Procedures; Assessments; Model Testing; Benefits ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Alternative Validation Practice of an Automated Faulting Measurement Method AN - 855700443; 14128564 AB - Several states have adopted profiler-based systems for automatic measurement of faulting in jointed concrete pavements. However, little published work exists that documents the validation process for these automated faulting systems. An alternative practice for making an initial assessment of a newly developed automated faulting method was documented. Findings from this experiment showed that a high-speed inertial profiler used in conjunction with a faulting reference device provides a practical validation method under controlled conditions. Furthermore, the algorithm that controls the automated faulting measurement method provides reliable and highly repeatable faulting results. The test equipment used in the experiment, as well as the data collection process, the analysis, the subsequent findings and recommendations, are documented. Show References JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Nazef, Abdenour AU - Mraz, Alexander AU - Choubane, Bouzid AD - Florida Department of Transportation, Materials Research Park Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 99 EP - 104 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2155 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/855700443?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Alternative+Validation+Practice+of+an+Automated+Faulting+Measurement+Method&rft.au=Nazef%2C+Abdenour%3BMraz%2C+Alexander%3BChoubane%2C+Bouzid&rft.aulast=Nazef&rft.aufirst=Abdenour&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=2155&rft.issue=&rft.spage=99&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2155-11 L2 - http://trb.metapress.com/content/wu1nl67773421736/?p=d0e8637e9ab443d88eb1a92090228a3c&pi=10 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - Last updated - 2011-11-11 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2155-11 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Measuring Friction of Patterned and Textured Pavements AN - 855699250; 14128563 AB - The Florida Department of Transportation initiated a field study to compare the suitability of two friction-testing devices for measuring the friction characteristics of patterned and textured crosswalks: (a) a site-specific dynamic friction tester (DFT) and (b) a semicontinuous locked wheel tester. The locked wheel testing was performed with both ribbed and smooth tires at 20, 30, and 40 mph (30, 50 and 65 km/h), respectively. Ten test sections were randomly selected to include the different types of patterned and textured processes currently approved for use in Florida. The results of this study indicated that the smooth tire measurements were, generally, in good agreement with the DFT, regardless of test speed. The correlation between the DFT and the ribbed tire test improved with the increasing speed of the locked wheel testing. In addition, for a given test method, harmonization of different test speeds was also performed to allow for the speed conversion of the friction coefficients. The flexibility provided by these harmonization efforts is of great practical use in evaluating the frictional characteristics of patterned and textured crosswalks, especially when dealing with constraints such as speed limits. The testing program, the data collection effort, and the subsequent analyses and findings are described, as well as the lessons learned from Florida's experience with patterned and textured pavements. Show References JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Holzschuher, Charles AU - Choubane, Bouzid AU - Lee, Hyung Suk AU - Jackson, N Mike AD - Florida Department of Transportation, Materials Research Park, 5007 Northeast 39th Avenue, Gainesville, FL 32609 Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 91 EP - 98 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2155 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/855699250?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Measuring+Friction+of+Patterned+and+Textured+Pavements&rft.au=Holzschuher%2C+Charles%3BChoubane%2C+Bouzid%3BLee%2C+Hyung+Suk%3BJackson%2C+N+Mike&rft.aulast=Holzschuher&rft.aufirst=Charles&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=2155&rft.issue=&rft.spage=91&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2155-10 L2 - http://trb.metapress.com/content/mm5v718157h43702/?p=803b163fc894430e9751214d02d7cb79&pi=9 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - Last updated - 2011-11-11 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2155-10 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Impact of Wide-Base Single Tires on Pavement Damage AN - 855699236; 14128562 AB - Dual tires have traditionally been used to limit pavement damage by efficiently distributing axle loads over a larger contact area than single tires. However, in recent years, the trucking industry, stating economic and safety benefits, has promoted the use of wide-base single tires. The Super Single tire, an early type of wide-base tire, proved inadequate and induced excessive pavement damage. By contrast, the new generation wide-base tires have contact areas that approach those of dual tires and offer the potential for improved performance. The Florida Department of Transportation investigated the pavement damage potential of four tire types, including a conventional dual tire (11R22.5), a Super Single (425/65R22.5), and two newly designed wide-base single tires (445/50R22.5 and 455/55R22.5 respectively). A controlled accelerated pavement testing program, in addition to theoretical modeling, was performed to determine critical pavement response parameters. Pavement damage was measured in terms of rutting and fatigue cracking (bottom-up or top-down), the predominant distresses in Florida. The investigation revealed that the 455-mm wide-base tire performed as well as the dual tire. By comparison, the 445-mm wide-base tire was shown to create more rut damage on a dense-graded pavement surface and was predicted to create more bottom-up cracking than a dual tire. As expected, the Super Single induced the most damage to the pavement. Show References JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Greene, James AU - Toros, Ulas AU - Kim, Sungho AU - Byron, Tom AU - Choubane, Bouzid AD - Florida Department of Transportation, Materials Research Park Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 82 EP - 90 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2155 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/855699236?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=The+Leadership+Quarterly&rft.atitle=Is+a+happy+leader+a+good+leader%3F+A+meta-analytic+investigation+of+leader+trait+affect+and+leadership&rft.au=Joseph%2C+Dana+L.%3BDhanani%2C+Lindsay+Y.%3BShen%2C+Winny%3BMcHugh%2C+Bridget+C.%3BMcCord%2C+Mallory+A.&rft.aulast=Joseph&rft.aufirst=Dana&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=558&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=The+Leadership+Quarterly&rft.issn=10489843&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.leaqua.2015.04.001 L2 - http://trb.metapress.com/content/v67v1803161502v2/?p=803b163fc894430e9751214d02d7cb79&pi=8 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - Last updated - 2011-11-11 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2155-09 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 5] T2 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 853675874; 14619-100347_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to a 5.2-mile segment of State Route 76 (SR-76) from South Mission Road to just east of the Interstate 15 (I-15) interchange in northern San Diego County, California are proposed. Within the project limits, SR-76 is currently a conventional highway with two lanes, nonstandard shoulders, and signalized at-grade intersections. Traffic on the route is over capacity and the highway is subject to congestion and travel delays. The project area consists of open space; agricultural fields; avocado and citrus groves; horse breeding and training facilities; horse pastures; scattered commercial developments; and some residential properties. The San Luis Rey River, which runs parallel and to the south of the existing SR-76 alignment, supports several areas of riparian habitat that are considered important for the preservation of sensitive vegetation and wildlife. Development within the study area is limited to a large extent by the large floodplain area of the San Luis Rey River Valley and upland areas to the north and south, which are mostly built-out with large-lot homes. The project area also includes the southern side of the San Luis Rey River Valley along the southern edge of the floodplain of the San Luis Rey River, as well as the floodplain itself. The proposed project would widen and realign SR-76 from two to four lanes and improve the SR-76/I-15 interchange within the communities of Bonsall and Fallbrook. A second park and ride facility would be constructed along SR-76 between Old Highway 395 and the southbound I-15 on-ramp with access from Old Highway 395. Additionally, the project would widen the SR-76/I-15 separation and upgrade the interchange on and off-ramps with the option of adding inner loops to create a partial cloverleaf configuration. In addition to a No Build alternative, this draft EIS evaluates two build alternatives: the Existing Alignment Alternative and the Southern Alignment Alternative. Each would construct SR-76 from South Mission Road to just east of I-15 as a four-lane facility and would have two 12-foot-wide eastbound lanes and two 12-foot-wide westbound lanes. Each alternative would require channelization lanes in some locations to improve intersection operations. Signalized intersections would occur at specific locations for local access. The eastbound and westbound lanes would be separated by a varying width median (29-foot typical width). There would be a 5-foot-wide minimum paved inside shoulder and an 8-foot-wide paved outside shoulder in each direction. The outside shoulders would serve the uses of bicycles, pedestrians, and emergency parking. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service in 2030 over existing levels of service, improve travel times within the corridor, and maintain the area as an effective link in the interregional movement of people and goods. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Southern Alignment Alternative would result in one full property acquisition and multiple partial property acquisitions. The Vessels Stallion Farm would be displaced and the character and scale of the area would be noticeably compromised by introducing a new transportation corridor into a largely undeveloped area. These impacts, combined with extensive landform modification and vegetation removal, would result in substantially reduced visual quality and character. New bridges spanning the river in two locations would have a pronounced negative impact on mature riparian vegetation along the riverbed and the open river valley. The arroyo toad, Southwestern willow flycatcher, least Bell's vireo, and coastal California gnatcatcher could be affected. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100347, 582 pages and maps, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CA-EIS-10-01-D KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675874?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+STATE+ROUTE+76+SOUTH+MISSION+ROAD+TO+INTERSTATE+15+HIGHWAY+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+STATE+ROUTE+76+SOUTH+MISSION+ROAD+TO+INTERSTATE+15+HIGHWAY+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 5] T2 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 853675649; 14619-100347_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to a 5.2-mile segment of State Route 76 (SR-76) from South Mission Road to just east of the Interstate 15 (I-15) interchange in northern San Diego County, California are proposed. Within the project limits, SR-76 is currently a conventional highway with two lanes, nonstandard shoulders, and signalized at-grade intersections. Traffic on the route is over capacity and the highway is subject to congestion and travel delays. The project area consists of open space; agricultural fields; avocado and citrus groves; horse breeding and training facilities; horse pastures; scattered commercial developments; and some residential properties. The San Luis Rey River, which runs parallel and to the south of the existing SR-76 alignment, supports several areas of riparian habitat that are considered important for the preservation of sensitive vegetation and wildlife. Development within the study area is limited to a large extent by the large floodplain area of the San Luis Rey River Valley and upland areas to the north and south, which are mostly built-out with large-lot homes. The project area also includes the southern side of the San Luis Rey River Valley along the southern edge of the floodplain of the San Luis Rey River, as well as the floodplain itself. The proposed project would widen and realign SR-76 from two to four lanes and improve the SR-76/I-15 interchange within the communities of Bonsall and Fallbrook. A second park and ride facility would be constructed along SR-76 between Old Highway 395 and the southbound I-15 on-ramp with access from Old Highway 395. Additionally, the project would widen the SR-76/I-15 separation and upgrade the interchange on and off-ramps with the option of adding inner loops to create a partial cloverleaf configuration. In addition to a No Build alternative, this draft EIS evaluates two build alternatives: the Existing Alignment Alternative and the Southern Alignment Alternative. Each would construct SR-76 from South Mission Road to just east of I-15 as a four-lane facility and would have two 12-foot-wide eastbound lanes and two 12-foot-wide westbound lanes. Each alternative would require channelization lanes in some locations to improve intersection operations. Signalized intersections would occur at specific locations for local access. The eastbound and westbound lanes would be separated by a varying width median (29-foot typical width). There would be a 5-foot-wide minimum paved inside shoulder and an 8-foot-wide paved outside shoulder in each direction. The outside shoulders would serve the uses of bicycles, pedestrians, and emergency parking. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service in 2030 over existing levels of service, improve travel times within the corridor, and maintain the area as an effective link in the interregional movement of people and goods. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Southern Alignment Alternative would result in one full property acquisition and multiple partial property acquisitions. The Vessels Stallion Farm would be displaced and the character and scale of the area would be noticeably compromised by introducing a new transportation corridor into a largely undeveloped area. These impacts, combined with extensive landform modification and vegetation removal, would result in substantially reduced visual quality and character. New bridges spanning the river in two locations would have a pronounced negative impact on mature riparian vegetation along the riverbed and the open river valley. The arroyo toad, Southwestern willow flycatcher, least Bell's vireo, and coastal California gnatcatcher could be affected. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100347, 582 pages and maps, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CA-EIS-10-01-D KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675649?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+STATE+ROUTE+76+SOUTH+MISSION+ROAD+TO+INTERSTATE+15+HIGHWAY+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+STATE+ROUTE+76+SOUTH+MISSION+ROAD+TO+INTERSTATE+15+HIGHWAY+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 5] T2 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 853675642; 14619-100347_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to a 5.2-mile segment of State Route 76 (SR-76) from South Mission Road to just east of the Interstate 15 (I-15) interchange in northern San Diego County, California are proposed. Within the project limits, SR-76 is currently a conventional highway with two lanes, nonstandard shoulders, and signalized at-grade intersections. Traffic on the route is over capacity and the highway is subject to congestion and travel delays. The project area consists of open space; agricultural fields; avocado and citrus groves; horse breeding and training facilities; horse pastures; scattered commercial developments; and some residential properties. The San Luis Rey River, which runs parallel and to the south of the existing SR-76 alignment, supports several areas of riparian habitat that are considered important for the preservation of sensitive vegetation and wildlife. Development within the study area is limited to a large extent by the large floodplain area of the San Luis Rey River Valley and upland areas to the north and south, which are mostly built-out with large-lot homes. The project area also includes the southern side of the San Luis Rey River Valley along the southern edge of the floodplain of the San Luis Rey River, as well as the floodplain itself. The proposed project would widen and realign SR-76 from two to four lanes and improve the SR-76/I-15 interchange within the communities of Bonsall and Fallbrook. A second park and ride facility would be constructed along SR-76 between Old Highway 395 and the southbound I-15 on-ramp with access from Old Highway 395. Additionally, the project would widen the SR-76/I-15 separation and upgrade the interchange on and off-ramps with the option of adding inner loops to create a partial cloverleaf configuration. In addition to a No Build alternative, this draft EIS evaluates two build alternatives: the Existing Alignment Alternative and the Southern Alignment Alternative. Each would construct SR-76 from South Mission Road to just east of I-15 as a four-lane facility and would have two 12-foot-wide eastbound lanes and two 12-foot-wide westbound lanes. Each alternative would require channelization lanes in some locations to improve intersection operations. Signalized intersections would occur at specific locations for local access. The eastbound and westbound lanes would be separated by a varying width median (29-foot typical width). There would be a 5-foot-wide minimum paved inside shoulder and an 8-foot-wide paved outside shoulder in each direction. The outside shoulders would serve the uses of bicycles, pedestrians, and emergency parking. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service in 2030 over existing levels of service, improve travel times within the corridor, and maintain the area as an effective link in the interregional movement of people and goods. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Southern Alignment Alternative would result in one full property acquisition and multiple partial property acquisitions. The Vessels Stallion Farm would be displaced and the character and scale of the area would be noticeably compromised by introducing a new transportation corridor into a largely undeveloped area. These impacts, combined with extensive landform modification and vegetation removal, would result in substantially reduced visual quality and character. New bridges spanning the river in two locations would have a pronounced negative impact on mature riparian vegetation along the riverbed and the open river valley. The arroyo toad, Southwestern willow flycatcher, least Bell's vireo, and coastal California gnatcatcher could be affected. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100347, 582 pages and maps, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CA-EIS-10-01-D KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675642?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=606&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=The+Leadership+Quarterly&rft.issn=10489843&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.leaqua.2015.05.006 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 5] T2 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 853675599; 14619-100347_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to a 5.2-mile segment of State Route 76 (SR-76) from South Mission Road to just east of the Interstate 15 (I-15) interchange in northern San Diego County, California are proposed. Within the project limits, SR-76 is currently a conventional highway with two lanes, nonstandard shoulders, and signalized at-grade intersections. Traffic on the route is over capacity and the highway is subject to congestion and travel delays. The project area consists of open space; agricultural fields; avocado and citrus groves; horse breeding and training facilities; horse pastures; scattered commercial developments; and some residential properties. The San Luis Rey River, which runs parallel and to the south of the existing SR-76 alignment, supports several areas of riparian habitat that are considered important for the preservation of sensitive vegetation and wildlife. Development within the study area is limited to a large extent by the large floodplain area of the San Luis Rey River Valley and upland areas to the north and south, which are mostly built-out with large-lot homes. The project area also includes the southern side of the San Luis Rey River Valley along the southern edge of the floodplain of the San Luis Rey River, as well as the floodplain itself. The proposed project would widen and realign SR-76 from two to four lanes and improve the SR-76/I-15 interchange within the communities of Bonsall and Fallbrook. A second park and ride facility would be constructed along SR-76 between Old Highway 395 and the southbound I-15 on-ramp with access from Old Highway 395. Additionally, the project would widen the SR-76/I-15 separation and upgrade the interchange on and off-ramps with the option of adding inner loops to create a partial cloverleaf configuration. In addition to a No Build alternative, this draft EIS evaluates two build alternatives: the Existing Alignment Alternative and the Southern Alignment Alternative. Each would construct SR-76 from South Mission Road to just east of I-15 as a four-lane facility and would have two 12-foot-wide eastbound lanes and two 12-foot-wide westbound lanes. Each alternative would require channelization lanes in some locations to improve intersection operations. Signalized intersections would occur at specific locations for local access. The eastbound and westbound lanes would be separated by a varying width median (29-foot typical width). There would be a 5-foot-wide minimum paved inside shoulder and an 8-foot-wide paved outside shoulder in each direction. The outside shoulders would serve the uses of bicycles, pedestrians, and emergency parking. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service in 2030 over existing levels of service, improve travel times within the corridor, and maintain the area as an effective link in the interregional movement of people and goods. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Southern Alignment Alternative would result in one full property acquisition and multiple partial property acquisitions. The Vessels Stallion Farm would be displaced and the character and scale of the area would be noticeably compromised by introducing a new transportation corridor into a largely undeveloped area. These impacts, combined with extensive landform modification and vegetation removal, would result in substantially reduced visual quality and character. New bridges spanning the river in two locations would have a pronounced negative impact on mature riparian vegetation along the riverbed and the open river valley. The arroyo toad, Southwestern willow flycatcher, least Bell's vireo, and coastal California gnatcatcher could be affected. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100347, 582 pages and maps, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CA-EIS-10-01-D KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675599?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+STATE+ROUTE+76+SOUTH+MISSION+ROAD+TO+INTERSTATE+15+HIGHWAY+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+STATE+ROUTE+76+SOUTH+MISSION+ROAD+TO+INTERSTATE+15+HIGHWAY+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 5] T2 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 853675534; 14619-100347_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to a 5.2-mile segment of State Route 76 (SR-76) from South Mission Road to just east of the Interstate 15 (I-15) interchange in northern San Diego County, California are proposed. Within the project limits, SR-76 is currently a conventional highway with two lanes, nonstandard shoulders, and signalized at-grade intersections. Traffic on the route is over capacity and the highway is subject to congestion and travel delays. The project area consists of open space; agricultural fields; avocado and citrus groves; horse breeding and training facilities; horse pastures; scattered commercial developments; and some residential properties. The San Luis Rey River, which runs parallel and to the south of the existing SR-76 alignment, supports several areas of riparian habitat that are considered important for the preservation of sensitive vegetation and wildlife. Development within the study area is limited to a large extent by the large floodplain area of the San Luis Rey River Valley and upland areas to the north and south, which are mostly built-out with large-lot homes. The project area also includes the southern side of the San Luis Rey River Valley along the southern edge of the floodplain of the San Luis Rey River, as well as the floodplain itself. The proposed project would widen and realign SR-76 from two to four lanes and improve the SR-76/I-15 interchange within the communities of Bonsall and Fallbrook. A second park and ride facility would be constructed along SR-76 between Old Highway 395 and the southbound I-15 on-ramp with access from Old Highway 395. Additionally, the project would widen the SR-76/I-15 separation and upgrade the interchange on and off-ramps with the option of adding inner loops to create a partial cloverleaf configuration. In addition to a No Build alternative, this draft EIS evaluates two build alternatives: the Existing Alignment Alternative and the Southern Alignment Alternative. Each would construct SR-76 from South Mission Road to just east of I-15 as a four-lane facility and would have two 12-foot-wide eastbound lanes and two 12-foot-wide westbound lanes. Each alternative would require channelization lanes in some locations to improve intersection operations. Signalized intersections would occur at specific locations for local access. The eastbound and westbound lanes would be separated by a varying width median (29-foot typical width). There would be a 5-foot-wide minimum paved inside shoulder and an 8-foot-wide paved outside shoulder in each direction. The outside shoulders would serve the uses of bicycles, pedestrians, and emergency parking. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service in 2030 over existing levels of service, improve travel times within the corridor, and maintain the area as an effective link in the interregional movement of people and goods. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Southern Alignment Alternative would result in one full property acquisition and multiple partial property acquisitions. The Vessels Stallion Farm would be displaced and the character and scale of the area would be noticeably compromised by introducing a new transportation corridor into a largely undeveloped area. These impacts, combined with extensive landform modification and vegetation removal, would result in substantially reduced visual quality and character. New bridges spanning the river in two locations would have a pronounced negative impact on mature riparian vegetation along the riverbed and the open river valley. The arroyo toad, Southwestern willow flycatcher, least Bell's vireo, and coastal California gnatcatcher could be affected. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100347, 582 pages and maps, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CA-EIS-10-01-D KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675534?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+STATE+ROUTE+76+SOUTH+MISSION+ROAD+TO+INTERSTATE+15+HIGHWAY+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+STATE+ROUTE+76+SOUTH+MISSION+ROAD+TO+INTERSTATE+15+HIGHWAY+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - MoDOT earthquake preparedness AN - 840345636; 2011-010417 JF - Scientific Investigations Report AU - Hillis, Don AU - Bennett, Rick A2 - Witt, Emitt C., III Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 67 PB - U. S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA KW - United States KW - risk management KW - geologic hazards KW - seismicity KW - planning KW - Missouri KW - government agencies KW - USGS KW - earthquakes KW - New Madrid region KW - Missouri Department of Transportation KW - 19:Seismology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/840345636?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Scientific+Investigations+Report&rft.atitle=MoDOT+earthquake+preparedness&rft.au=Hillis%2C+Don%3BBennett%2C+Rick&rft.aulast=Hillis&rft.aufirst=Don&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=67&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Scientific+Investigations+Report&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5173/ http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Preparing for a significant central United States earthquake; science needs of the response and recovery community N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - PubXState - VA N1 - SuppNotes - Accessed on Dec. 14, 2010; Prepared in cooperation with the Missouri University of Science and Technology N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - #06439 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - earthquakes; geologic hazards; government agencies; Missouri; Missouri Department of Transportation; New Madrid region; planning; risk management; seismicity; United States; USGS ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HELENA BYPASS PROJECT, FROM COUNTY ROAD 52 IN HELENA TO STATE ROUTE 261 NEAR BEARDEN ROAD, SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA (PROJECT NO. ST-059-261-004). AN - 818791547; 14700 AB - PURPOSE: Construction of a bypass of the City of Helena, Alabama, from County Road 52 (CR-52) to State Route 261 (SR-261), in northwestern Shelby County is proposed. Helena is located 15 miles from downtown Birmingham and Shelby County, as home to many suburban communities of metropolitan Birmingham, is the fastest growing county in the state. The historic district of Old Towne Helena currently experiences congestion problems, especially during the morning and evening rush hours. There are two active railroads with at-grade crossings of SR 261 in the Old Towne area which regularly cause delays and congestion. Five alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The project would begin southwest of the downtown area on CR-52 approximately 6,600 feet west of the existing intersection of CR-52 and SR-261 and traverse northeasterly approximately four miles to a terminus with SR-261 near Bearden Road. The proposed facility would provide a four-lane divided highway link which would connect the planned widened SR 261 with CR 52. A five-lane section would be included for a portion of the bypass to accommodate tie-in to a planned five-lane section of SR-261. The alternative alignments range in length from 3.6 miles to 3.9 miles and would all include a hydraulic structure to cross Buck Creek, a tributary of the Cahaba River. Grade separated crossings for the two railroads would also be included. The total cost for the project is estimated at $22 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide some relief for the existing congested road network and the proposed project would serve as the transportation backbone for Helena's ongoing development. Travel times would be improved for all emergency services as well as local and through traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Short-term traffic disruption, soil erosion and sedimentation, air quality reduction, noise increases, and utilities disruptions could occur during the estimated 30 month construction period. Unavoidable impacts to wetlands would range from 0.1 acre to 1.7 acres. The bridge-crossing of Buck Creek would impact 800 feet of the 100-year floodplain. Under Alternative II and Alternative IIA, eight residences and three businesses would be displaced in the Starkey Street neighborhood. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100430, 351 pages and maps, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-AL-EIS-07-02-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Bridges KW - Creeks KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Noise Assessments KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Alabama KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/818791547?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HELENA+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+FROM+COUNTY+ROAD+52+IN+HELENA+TO+STATE+ROUTE+261+NEAR+BEARDEN+ROAD%2C+SHELBY+COUNTY%2C+ALABAMA+%28PROJECT+NO.+ST-059-261-004%29.&rft.title=HELENA+BYPASS+PROJECT%2C+FROM+COUNTY+ROAD+52+IN+HELENA+TO+STATE+ROUTE+261+NEAR+BEARDEN+ROAD%2C+SHELBY+COUNTY%2C+ALABAMA+%28PROJECT+NO.+ST-059-261-004%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Montgomery, Alabama; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Field evaluation of reconstructed roadways incorporating full depth reclamation AN - 818636853; 2011-006647 JF - Annual Meeting - Transportation Research Board AU - Miller, Heather J AU - Amatrudo, Meghan AU - Eaton, Robert AU - Hall, Andrew AU - Kestler, Maureen A Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 14 PB - Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC VL - 89 KW - United States KW - soil mechanics KW - cost KW - thawing KW - depth KW - temperature KW - New Hampshire KW - cold weather construction KW - frost action KW - construction KW - winter maintenance KW - roads KW - construction materials KW - 30:Engineering geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/818636853?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Annual+Meeting+-+Transportation+Research+Board&rft.atitle=Field+evaluation+of+reconstructed+roadways+incorporating+full+depth+reclamation&rft.au=Miller%2C+Heather+J%3BAmatrudo%2C+Meghan%3BEaton%2C+Robert%3BHall%2C+Andrew%3BKestler%2C+Maureen+A&rft.aulast=Miller&rft.aufirst=Heather&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=89&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Annual+Meeting+-+Transportation+Research+Board&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Transportation Research Board 89th annual meeting N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 12 N1 - PubXState - DC N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 3 tables N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - #06426 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - cold weather construction; construction; construction materials; cost; depth; frost action; New Hampshire; roads; soil mechanics; temperature; thawing; United States; winter maintenance ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 76 SOUTH MISSION ROAD TO INTERSTATE 15 HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 758977898; 14619 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to a 5.2-mile segment of State Route 76 (SR-76) from South Mission Road to just east of the Interstate 15 (I-15) interchange in northern San Diego County, California are proposed. Within the project limits, SR-76 is currently a conventional highway with two lanes, nonstandard shoulders, and signalized at-grade intersections. Traffic on the route is over capacity and the highway is subject to congestion and travel delays. The project area consists of open space; agricultural fields; avocado and citrus groves; horse breeding and training facilities; horse pastures; scattered commercial developments; and some residential properties. The San Luis Rey River, which runs parallel and to the south of the existing SR-76 alignment, supports several areas of riparian habitat that are considered important for the preservation of sensitive vegetation and wildlife. Development within the study area is limited to a large extent by the large floodplain area of the San Luis Rey River Valley and upland areas to the north and south, which are mostly built-out with large-lot homes. The project area also includes the southern side of the San Luis Rey River Valley along the southern edge of the floodplain of the San Luis Rey River, as well as the floodplain itself. The proposed project would widen and realign SR-76 from two to four lanes and improve the SR-76/I-15 interchange within the communities of Bonsall and Fallbrook. A second park and ride facility would be constructed along SR-76 between Old Highway 395 and the southbound I-15 on-ramp with access from Old Highway 395. Additionally, the project would widen the SR-76/I-15 separation and upgrade the interchange on and off-ramps with the option of adding inner loops to create a partial cloverleaf configuration. In addition to a No Build alternative, this draft EIS evaluates two build alternatives: the Existing Alignment Alternative and the Southern Alignment Alternative. Each would construct SR-76 from South Mission Road to just east of I-15 as a four-lane facility and would have two 12-foot-wide eastbound lanes and two 12-foot-wide westbound lanes. Each alternative would require channelization lanes in some locations to improve intersection operations. Signalized intersections would occur at specific locations for local access. The eastbound and westbound lanes would be separated by a varying width median (29-foot typical width). There would be a 5-foot-wide minimum paved inside shoulder and an 8-foot-wide paved outside shoulder in each direction. The outside shoulders would serve the uses of bicycles, pedestrians, and emergency parking. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would maintain or improve future traffic levels of service in 2030 over existing levels of service, improve travel times within the corridor, and maintain the area as an effective link in the interregional movement of people and goods. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the Southern Alignment Alternative would result in one full property acquisition and multiple partial property acquisitions. The Vessels Stallion Farm would be displaced and the character and scale of the area would be noticeably compromised by introducing a new transportation corridor into a largely undeveloped area. These impacts, combined with extensive landform modification and vegetation removal, would result in substantially reduced visual quality and character. New bridges spanning the river in two locations would have a pronounced negative impact on mature riparian vegetation along the riverbed and the open river valley. The arroyo toad, Southwestern willow flycatcher, least Bell's vireo, and coastal California gnatcatcher could be affected. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). JF - EPA number: 100347, 582 pages and maps, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CA-EIS-10-01-D KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parking KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Visual Resources KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/758977898?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Digests&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+STATE+ROUTE+76+SOUTH+MISSION+ROAD+TO+INTERSTATE+15+HIGHWAY+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+STATE+ROUTE+76+SOUTH+MISSION+ROAD+TO+INTERSTATE+15+HIGHWAY+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+DIEGO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, District of Columbia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Protected-Permissive Left-Turn Signal Control Mode AN - 755129577; 13487987 AB - Protected-permissive left-turn (PPLT) and protected only (PO) left-turn signal control modes have been widely used at signalized intersections. The selection between these two control modes is a complicated process in which practitioners need to consider safety and operational impacts. In this study researchers developed analytical models for estimating the operational benefits and the safety risks associated with the use of the PPLT control mode. Evaluation results demonstrated that the proposed models could provide accurate and reliable estimates for the delay reduction and the potential conflicts caused by the use of the PPLT mode. Results of this study will be useful for developing quantitative criteria for the selection between the PO and PPLT modes. Show References JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Qi, Yi AU - Chen, Xin AU - Guo, Aohan AU - Yu, Lei AD - Department of Transportation Studies, Texas Southern University, 3100 Cleburne Avenue, Houston, TX 77004 Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 37 EP - 49 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2149 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Risk Abstracts KW - conflicts KW - Transportation KW - R2 23020:Technological risks UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/755129577?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ariskabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Protected-Permissive+Left-Turn+Signal+Control+Mode&rft.au=Qi%2C+Yi%3BChen%2C+Xin%3BGuo%2C+Aohan%3BYu%2C+Lei&rft.aulast=Qi&rft.aufirst=Yi&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=2149&rft.issue=&rft.spage=37&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2149-05 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - conflicts; Transportation DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2149-05 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Nanotechnology AN - 754891194; 13487927 AB - This paper outlines cement and concrete properties that challenge engineers and discusses the benefits that could be derived from changes in the smallest structure of cementitious and other concrete materials. Concrete is the most widely used building material in the world. Roman concrete structures still exist today. Even with concrete's versatility and durability, certain properties continue to pose challenges. The ability to modify essential molecular building blocks provides the potential to make great strides in reducing or eliminating numerous mechanisms that can compromise the life of concrete. This paper discusses current durability challenges specific to transportation structures-both bridges and pavements-and the role that nanotechnology can play in addressing these issues. In structural concrete, applications could include improved tensile strength, increased ductility, reduced permeability, and reduced shrinkage. These enhancements could significantly reduce maintenance costs and greatly extend the life of most structures. Reduced shrinkage, modification of the hydration process, minimized thermal movement, reduced permeability, and improved workability would greatly extend pavement life. Nanotechnology could play a key role in environmental stewardship through significant reduction in the carbon footprint, as well as by making the cement production process more efficient. Properties that adversely affect the construction process are also feasible applications of this technology. Other modifications of the properties of concrete that could greatly increase concrete life include the following: decreasing volume change, improved mechanical performance, greater freeze-thaw resistance, reduced water migration, improved air system stability, improved properties of marginal-quality aggregates, and improved curing methods. Show References JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Grove, Jim AU - Vanikar, Suneel AU - Crawford, Gary AD - Federal Highway Administration, Office of Pavement Technology, 2711 South Loop Drive, Suite 4502, Ames, Iowa 50010 Y1 - 2010///0, PY - 2010 DA - 0, 2010 SP - 47 EP - 51 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2141 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Sustainability Science Abstracts KW - Permeability KW - migration KW - Transportation KW - Bridges KW - Cement KW - Construction materials KW - Concrete KW - Maintenance KW - Construction industry KW - nanotechnology KW - Technology KW - M3 1010:Issues in Sustainable Development UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/754891194?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Assamodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Nanotechnology&rft.au=Grove%2C+Jim%3BVanikar%2C+Suneel%3BCrawford%2C+Gary&rft.aulast=Grove&rft.aufirst=Jim&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=2141&rft.issue=&rft.spage=47&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2141-09 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-05-13 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - migration; Permeability; Bridges; Transportation; Cement; Construction materials; Concrete; Construction industry; Maintenance; Technology; nanotechnology DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2141-09 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - REVIEW: Aviation Combustion Toxicology: An Overview AN - 745643655; 13153781 AB - Aviation combustion toxicology is a subspecialty of the field of aerospace toxicology, which is composed of aerospace and toxicology. The term aerospace, that is, the environment extending above and beyond the surface of the Earth, is also used to represent the combined fields of aeronautics and astronautics. Aviation is another term interchangeably used with aerospace and aeronautics and is explained as the science and art of operating powered aircraft. Toxicology deals with the adverse effects of substances on living organisms. Although toxicology borrows knowledge from biology, chemistry, immunology, pathology, physiology, and public health, the most closely related field to toxicology is pharmacology. Economic toxicology, environmental toxicology, and forensic toxicology, including combustion toxicology, are the three main branches of toxicology. In this overview, a literature search for the period of 1960-2007 was performed and information related to aviation combustion toxicology collected. The overview included introduction; combustion, fire, and smoke; smoke gas toxicity; aircraft material testing; fire gases and their interactive effects; result interpretation; carboxyhemoglobin and blood cyanide ion levels; pyrolytic products of aircraft engine oils, fluids, and lubricants; and references. This review is anticipated to be an informative resource for aviation combustion toxicology and fire-related casualties. JF - Journal of Analytical Toxicology AU - Chaturvedi, Arvind K AD - Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory (AAM-610), Aerospace Medical Research Division, Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125-5066 Y1 - 2010/01// PY - 2010 DA - Jan 2010 SP - 1 EP - 16 PB - Preston Publications, Inc., 6600 W. Touhy Ave. Niles IL 60714 USA VL - 34 IS - 1 SN - 0146-4760, 0146-4760 KW - Toxicology Abstracts KW - Fires KW - Pharmacology KW - Oils KW - Toxicity KW - Public health KW - Combustion KW - Smoke KW - Blood KW - Cyanide KW - Gases KW - Aircraft KW - Reviews KW - Lubricants KW - Economics KW - Carboxyhemoglobin KW - Forensic science KW - Side effects KW - X 24300:Methods UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/745643655?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Atoxicologyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Analytical+Toxicology&rft.atitle=REVIEW%3A+Aviation+Combustion+Toxicology%3A+An+Overview&rft.au=Chaturvedi%2C+Arvind+K&rft.aulast=Chaturvedi&rft.aufirst=Arvind&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Analytical+Toxicology&rft.issn=01464760&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/pres/jat/2010/00000034/00000001/art00001 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-07-01 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-29 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Fires; Pharmacology; Oils; Toxicity; Combustion; Public health; Smoke; Blood; Gases; Cyanide; Aircraft; Lubricants; Reviews; Economics; Forensic science; Carboxyhemoglobin; Side effects ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Decision Support from Genetic Algorithms for Ship Collision Avoidance Route Planning and Alerts AN - 21203594; 11592934 AB - When an officer of the watch (OOW) faces complicated marine traffic, a suitable decision support tool could be employed in support of collision avoidance decisions, to reduce the burden and greatly improve the safety of marine traffic. Decisions on routes to avoid collisions could also consider economy as well as safety. Through simulating the biological evolution model, this research adopts the genetic algorithm used in artificial intelligence to find a theoretically safety-critical recommendation for the shortest route of collision avoidance from an economic viewpoint, combining the international regulations for preventing collisions at sea (COLREGS) and the safety domain of a ship. Based on this recommendation, an optimal safe avoidance turning angle, navigation restoration time and navigational restoration angle will also be provided. A Geographic Information System (GIS) will be used as the platform for display and operation. In order to achieve advance notice of alerts and due preparation for collision avoidance, a Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) operator and the OOW can use this system as a reference to assess collision avoidance at present location. JF - Journal of Navigation AU - Tsou, Ming-Cheng AU - Kao, Sheng-Long AU - Su, Chien-Min AD - (National Taiwan Ocean University, Department of Transportation and Navigation Science), d86228006@yahoo.com.tw Y1 - 2010/01// PY - 2010 DA - January 2010 SP - 167 EP - 182 PB - Cambridge University Press, The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU UK VL - 63 IS - 1 SN - 0373-4633, 0373-4633 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts; Oceanic Abstracts; ASFA 2: Ocean Technology Policy & Non-Living Resources KW - Ships KW - Artificial intelligence KW - Decision support systems KW - Remote sensing KW - Algorithms KW - Avoidance reactions KW - collision avoidance KW - Navigation KW - Restoration KW - Collision avoidance KW - navigation KW - Economics KW - Offshore structures KW - Traffic safety KW - Geographic information systems KW - International regulations KW - Marine transportation KW - Q2 09123:Conservation KW - H 2000:Transportation KW - O 7060:Navigation and Communications UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/21203594?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahealthsafetyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Navigation&rft.atitle=Decision+Support+from+Genetic+Algorithms+for+Ship+Collision+Avoidance+Route+Planning+and+Alerts&rft.au=Tsou%2C+Ming-Cheng%3BKao%2C+Sheng-Long%3BSu%2C+Chien-Min&rft.aulast=Tsou&rft.aufirst=Ming-Cheng&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=63&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=167&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Navigation&rft.issn=03734633&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017%2FS037346330999021X LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-01-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-02-04 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Ships; Artificial intelligence; Collision avoidance; Offshore structures; Algorithms; Avoidance reactions; Navigation; Restoration; navigation; Decision support systems; Economics; Remote sensing; International regulations; Geographic information systems; Traffic safety; collision avoidance; Marine transportation DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S037346330999021X ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Human performance interfaces in air traffic control AN - 21123457; 11183879 AB - This paper examines how human performance factors in air traffic control (ATC) affect each other through their mutual interactions. The paper extends the conceptual SHEL model of ergonomics to describe the ATC system as human performance interfaces in which the air traffic controllers interact with other human performance factors including other controllers, software, hardware, environment, and organisation. New research hypotheses about the relationships between human performance interfaces of the system are developed and tested on data collected from air traffic controllers, using structural equation modelling. The research result suggests that organisation influences play a more significant role than individual differences or peer influences on how the controllers interact with the software, hardware, and environment of the ATC system. There are mutual influences between the controller-software, controller-hardware, controller- environment, and controller-organisation interfaces of the ATC system, with the exception of the controller- controller interface. Research findings of this study provide practical insights in managing human performance interfaces of the ATC system in the face of internal or external change, particularly in understanding its possible consequences in relation to the interactions between human performance factors. JF - Applied Ergonomics AU - Chang, Yu-Hern AU - Yeh, Chung-Hsing AD - Department of Transportation and Communications Management, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701, Taiwan, chunghsing.yeh@infotech.monash.edu.au Y1 - 2010/01// PY - 2010 DA - Jan 2010 SP - 123 EP - 129 PB - Elsevier Science, The Boulevard Kidlington Oxford OX5 1GB UK VL - 41 IS - 1 SN - 0003-6870, 0003-6870 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Computer programs KW - air traffic control KW - Human factors KW - Ergonomics KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/21123457?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahealthsafetyabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Applied+Ergonomics&rft.atitle=Human+performance+interfaces+in+air+traffic+control&rft.au=Chang%2C+Yu-Hern%3BYeh%2C+Chung-Hsing&rft.aulast=Chang&rft.aufirst=Yu-Hern&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=123&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Applied+Ergonomics&rft.issn=00036870&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.apergo.2009.06.002 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2009-11-01 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-14 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Human factors; air traffic control; Ergonomics; Computer programs DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.06.002 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Tarkio oil field, Atchison County, Missouri; geography, geology and structure of the field AN - 1769968790; 2016-019746 JF - Field Trip Guidebook - Association of Missouri Geologists AU - Pope, John P AU - Pope, Diana L AU - Davis, George H Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 13 EP - 28 PB - Association of Missouri Geologists, Rolla, MO VL - 57 KW - United States KW - Tarkio Field KW - tectonic elements KW - Atchison County Missouri KW - Pennsylvanian KW - Paleozoic KW - Missouri KW - Carboniferous KW - sandstone KW - petroleum KW - production KW - oil and gas fields KW - reservoir rocks KW - oil wells KW - sedimentary rocks KW - traps KW - stratigraphic units KW - clastic rocks KW - 29A:Economic geology, geology of energy sources UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1769968790?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.atitle=Tarkio+oil+field%2C+Atchison+County%2C+Missouri%3B+geography%2C+geology+and+structure+of+the+field&rft.au=Pope%2C+John+P%3BPope%2C+Diana+L%3BDavis%2C+George+H&rft.aulast=Pope&rft.aufirst=John&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=&rft.spage=13&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.missourigeologists.org/Meeting2010/AMGguidebook2010.pdf http://www.missourigeologists.org/FieldtripsandGuidebooks.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2016-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 14 N1 - PubXState - MO N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. strat. cols., 1 table, sketch maps N1 - Last updated - 2016-03-03 N1 - CODEN - #06604 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Atchison County Missouri; Carboniferous; clastic rocks; Missouri; oil and gas fields; oil wells; Paleozoic; Pennsylvanian; petroleum; production; reservoir rocks; sandstone; sedimentary rocks; stratigraphic units; Tarkio Field; tectonic elements; traps; United States ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Wind energy in northwest Missouri AN - 1769968703; 2016-019747 JF - Field Trip Guidebook - Association of Missouri Geologists AU - Pope, John P AU - Pope, Diana L AU - Davis, George H Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 29 EP - 43 PB - Association of Missouri Geologists, Rolla, MO VL - 57 KW - wind energy KW - United States KW - energy sources KW - Missouri KW - northwestern Missouri KW - new energy sources KW - wind turbines KW - construction KW - environmental effects KW - design KW - 29A:Economic geology, geology of energy sources UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1769968703?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.atitle=Wind+energy+in+northwest+Missouri&rft.au=Pope%2C+John+P%3BPope%2C+Diana+L%3BDavis%2C+George+H&rft.aulast=Pope&rft.aufirst=John&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=&rft.spage=29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.missourigeologists.org/Meeting2010/AMGguidebook2010.pdf http://www.missourigeologists.org/FieldtripsandGuidebooks.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2016-01-01 N1 - PubXState - MO N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. sketch maps N1 - Last updated - 2016-03-03 N1 - CODEN - #06604 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - construction; design; energy sources; environmental effects; Missouri; new energy sources; northwestern Missouri; United States; wind energy; wind turbines ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Landforms of northwest Missouri (Loess Hills and Missouri River alluvial plain) AN - 1769968666; 2016-019749 JF - Field Trip Guidebook - Association of Missouri Geologists AU - Pope, John P AU - Pope, Diana L AU - Davis, George H Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 55 EP - 81 PB - Association of Missouri Geologists, Rolla, MO VL - 57 KW - United States KW - soils KW - Loess Hills KW - imagery KW - clastic sediments KW - Missouri KW - northwestern Missouri KW - landforms KW - alluvial plains KW - satellite methods KW - Missouri River valley KW - relief KW - topography KW - classification KW - sediments KW - fluvial features KW - loess KW - horizons KW - remote sensing KW - 23:Geomorphology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1769968666?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.atitle=Landforms+of+northwest+Missouri+%28Loess+Hills+and+Missouri+River+alluvial+plain%29&rft.au=Pope%2C+John+P%3BPope%2C+Diana+L%3BDavis%2C+George+H&rft.aulast=Pope&rft.aufirst=John&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=&rft.spage=55&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.missourigeologists.org/Meeting2010/AMGguidebook2010.pdf http://www.missourigeologists.org/FieldtripsandGuidebooks.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2016-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 30 N1 - PubXState - MO N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. block diags., sketch maps N1 - Last updated - 2016-03-03 N1 - CODEN - #06604 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - alluvial plains; classification; clastic sediments; fluvial features; horizons; imagery; landforms; loess; Loess Hills; Missouri; Missouri River valley; northwestern Missouri; relief; remote sensing; satellite methods; sediments; soils; topography; United States ER - TY - JOUR T1 - From alternative energy to the Pennsylvanian; alternative energy, petroleum, loess, wind turbines and Pennsylvanian stratigraphy AN - 1769968630; 2016-019744 JF - Field Trip Guidebook - Association of Missouri Geologists AU - Pope, John P AU - Pope, Diana L AU - Davis, George H Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 116 PB - Association of Missouri Geologists, Rolla, MO VL - 57 KW - resources KW - lithostratigraphy KW - petrology KW - Pennsylvanian KW - Paleozoic KW - guidebook KW - Carboniferous KW - surficial geology KW - petroleum KW - landforms KW - field trips KW - areal geology KW - energy sources KW - new energy sources KW - stratigraphic units KW - 13:Areal geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1769968630?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.atitle=From+alternative+energy+to+the+Pennsylvanian%3B+alternative+energy%2C+petroleum%2C+loess%2C+wind+turbines+and+Pennsylvanian+stratigraphy&rft.au=Pope%2C+John+P%3BPope%2C+Diana+L%3BDavis%2C+George+H&rft.aulast=Caseras&rft.aufirst=Xavier&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=461&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Bipolar+Disorders&rft.issn=13985647&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111%2Fbdi.12292 L2 - http://www.missourigeologists.org/Meeting2010/AMGguidebook2010.pdf http://www.missourigeologists.org/FieldtripsandGuidebooks.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2016-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 83 N1 - PubXState - MO N1 - Document feature - illus. N1 - SuppNotes - Accessed on June 16, 2014; field trip from the Association of Missouri Geologists, 57th annual meeting, Maryville, MO, Oct. 8-9, 2010; individual papers are cited separately N1 - Last updated - 2016-03-03 N1 - CODEN - #06604 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - areal geology; Carboniferous; energy sources; field trips; guidebook; landforms; lithostratigraphy; new energy sources; Paleozoic; Pennsylvanian; petroleum; petrology; resources; stratigraphic units; surficial geology ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Geologic studies necessary for the design of wind turbine foundations AN - 1769968478; 2016-019748 JF - Field Trip Guidebook - Association of Missouri Geologists AU - Davis, George H AU - Pope, John P AU - Pope, Diana L Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 45 EP - 54 PB - Association of Missouri Geologists, Rolla, MO VL - 57 KW - wind energy KW - United States KW - bedrock KW - engineering properties KW - site exploration KW - wind turbines KW - rock mechanics KW - foundations KW - energy sources KW - new energy sources KW - economics KW - construction KW - winds KW - design KW - construction materials KW - 30:Engineering geology KW - 29A:Economic geology, geology of energy sources UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1769968478?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.atitle=Geologic+studies+necessary+for+the+design+of+wind+turbine+foundations&rft.au=Davis%2C+George+H%3BPope%2C+John+P%3BPope%2C+Diana+L&rft.aulast=Davis&rft.aufirst=George&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=&rft.spage=45&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.missourigeologists.org/Meeting2010/AMGguidebook2010.pdf http://www.missourigeologists.org/FieldtripsandGuidebooks.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2016-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 11 N1 - PubXState - MO N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. sketch map N1 - Last updated - 2016-03-03 N1 - CODEN - #06604 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - bedrock; construction; construction materials; design; economics; energy sources; engineering properties; foundations; new energy sources; rock mechanics; site exploration; United States; wind energy; wind turbines; winds ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Cyclothems of the middle and upper Topeka Formation, (upper Shawnee Group, Virgilian) in Barrett Hollow, Holt County, Missouri AN - 1769968427; 2016-019750 JF - Field Trip Guidebook - Association of Missouri Geologists AU - Pope, John P AU - Pope, Diana L AU - Davis, George H Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 83 EP - 116 PB - Association of Missouri Geologists, Rolla, MO VL - 57 KW - United States KW - lithostratigraphy KW - Pennsylvanian KW - biostratigraphy KW - Paleozoic KW - Missouri KW - Carboniferous KW - Midcontinent KW - Topeka Formation KW - Virgilian KW - planar bedding structures KW - Holt County Missouri KW - Upper Pennsylvanian KW - cyclothems KW - Barrett Hollow Missouri KW - Shawnee Group KW - sedimentary structures KW - 06A:Sedimentary petrology KW - 12:Stratigraphy UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1769968427?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.atitle=Cyclothems+of+the+middle+and+upper+Topeka+Formation%2C+%28upper+Shawnee+Group%2C+Virgilian%29+in+Barrett+Hollow%2C+Holt+County%2C+Missouri&rft.au=Pope%2C+John+P%3BPope%2C+Diana+L%3BDavis%2C+George+H&rft.aulast=Pope&rft.aufirst=John&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=&rft.spage=83&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.missourigeologists.org/Meeting2010/AMGguidebook2010.pdf http://www.missourigeologists.org/FieldtripsandGuidebooks.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2016-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 70 N1 - PubXState - MO N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. strat. cols., 3 plates, geol. sketch maps N1 - Last updated - 2016-03-03 N1 - CODEN - #06604 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Barrett Hollow Missouri; biostratigraphy; Carboniferous; cyclothems; Holt County Missouri; lithostratigraphy; Midcontinent; Missouri; Paleozoic; Pennsylvanian; planar bedding structures; sedimentary structures; Shawnee Group; Topeka Formation; United States; Upper Pennsylvanian; Virgilian ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Northwest Missouri State University Alternative Energy Project AN - 1769968113; 2016-019745 JF - Field Trip Guidebook - Association of Missouri Geologists AU - Pope, John P AU - Pope, Diana L AU - Davis, George H Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 1 EP - 11 PB - Association of Missouri Geologists, Rolla, MO VL - 57 KW - programs KW - Northwest Missouri State University KW - recycling KW - biomass KW - biofuels KW - petroleum KW - environmental management KW - alternative energy KW - energy sources KW - conservation KW - sustainable development KW - new energy sources KW - academic institutions KW - 29A:Economic geology, geology of energy sources KW - 22:Environmental geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1769968113?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.atitle=Northwest+Missouri+State+University+Alternative+Energy+Project&rft.au=Pope%2C+John+P%3BPope%2C+Diana+L%3BDavis%2C+George+H&rft.aulast=Pope&rft.aufirst=John&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=&rft.spage=1&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Field+Trip+Guidebook+-+Association+of+Missouri+Geologists&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.missourigeologists.org/Meeting2010/AMGguidebook2010.pdf http://www.missourigeologists.org/FieldtripsandGuidebooks.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2016, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2016-01-01 N1 - PubXState - MO N1 - Document feature - illus. N1 - Last updated - 2016-03-03 N1 - CODEN - #06604 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - academic institutions; alternative energy; biofuels; biomass; conservation; energy sources; environmental management; new energy sources; Northwest Missouri State University; petroleum; programs; recycling; sustainable development ER - TY - JOUR T1 - The modified Vlasov foundation model; an attractive approach for beams resting on elastic supports AN - 1722155262; 2015-097353 AB - This paper is intended to give a unified framework and to apply the modified Vlasov foundation model to static analysis of beams resting on elastic foundation whose concept is widely encountered in engineering practice. In the design of such structures, to describe the foundation response to applied loads, the mechanical model of Winkler is often used, for almost one and a half century. However, it has some shortcomings, mainly because it assumes no interaction between the adjacent springs and thus neglects the vertical shearing stress that occurs within subgrade materials. In this paper, the Vlasov approach, applied to static analysis of beams resting on elastic foundations, is presented as an alternative to the classical Winkler model. This idealization provides much more information on the stress and deformation within soil mass compared to the well-known Winkler model, and it has the important advantage of eliminating the necessity of arbitrarily determining the values of the foundation parameters. A numerical investigation on applying the Vlasov approach to the static analysis of beams resting on elastic supports is also presented. The solutions of sample problems, obtained by using the Vlasov model, are compared with results obtained on more complex numerical models. JF - The Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering AU - Teodoru, Iancu-Bogdan AU - Musat, Vasile Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 1 EP - 13 PB - Mete Oner, Stillwater, OK VL - 15 IS - Bundle C KW - soil mechanics KW - Vlasov model KW - Poisson's ratio KW - numerical models KW - Winkler model KW - strain KW - engineering properties KW - shear stress KW - elastic properties KW - stress KW - statistical analysis KW - mechanical properties KW - mathematical models KW - elastic constants KW - deformation KW - models KW - finite element analysis KW - foundations KW - soil-structure interface KW - beams KW - 30:Engineering geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1722155262?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=The+Electronic+Journal+of+Geotechnical+Engineering&rft.atitle=The+modified+Vlasov+foundation+model%3B+an+attractive+approach+for+beams+resting+on+elastic+supports&rft.au=Teodoru%2C+Iancu-Bogdan%3BMusat%2C+Vasile&rft.aulast=Teodoru&rft.aufirst=Iancu-Bogdan&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=Bundle+C&rft.spage=1&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=The+Electronic+Journal+of+Geotechnical+Engineering&rft.issn=1089-3032&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.ejge.com/Index_ejge.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2017, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2015-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 17 N1 - PubXState - OK N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 2 tables N1 - Last updated - 2017-01-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - beams; deformation; elastic constants; elastic properties; engineering properties; finite element analysis; foundations; mathematical models; mechanical properties; models; numerical models; Poisson's ratio; shear stress; soil mechanics; soil-structure interface; statistical analysis; strain; stress; Vlasov model; Winkler model ER - TY - JOUR T1 - New Approach to Appraisal of Rail Freight Projects in South Korea AN - 1671234535; 14128596 AB - This paper contributes to the estimation of the value of rail freight transit time savings, reliability, and service frequency for producers and transport operators by using stated preference data for short-haul rail freight shipments in South Korea. To appraise investments in freight projects in South Korea, the mixed logit model was used to determine the value of rail freight transit time savings, resulting in an estimated savings of about 2.31/h per shipment. The value of rail freight reliability (the percentage of on-time arrivals and departures) is2.78/h of delay and 0.54/day for scheduled freight service delay. The results for freight time value for different economic agents are surprising: shippers perceived the value of transit time, transit time reliability, and service frequency to be far higher than producers did. Shippers valued rail freight transit time savings at about2.35/metric ton h, whereas this same value for producers was $1.21/metric ton h. When the time benefit based on these values was added to the preliminary feasibility evaluation for 20 freight railroad infrastructure projects in South Korea, the number of projects for which benefits outweighed costs increased from four to 11. Show References JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Kang, Kyungwoo AU - Strauss-Wieder, Anne AU - Eom, Jin Ki AD - Department of Transportation Engineering, Hanyang University, Sa-3-dong, Ansan 425-791, South Korea Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 52 EP - 58 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2159 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Feasibility KW - Transportation KW - Rails KW - Transport KW - Delay KW - Transit time KW - Economics KW - Appraisals KW - Shipments UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1671234535?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=New+Approach+to+Appraisal+of+Rail+Freight+Projects+in+South+Korea&rft.au=Kang%2C+Kyungwoo%3BStrauss-Wieder%2C+Anne%3BEom%2C+Jin+Ki&rft.aulast=Kang&rft.aufirst=Kyungwoo&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=2159&rft.issue=&rft.spage=52&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2159-07 L2 - http://trb.metapress.com/content/v9070p3w123258l8/?p=18cc89134d094865a479f03b9d58dbae&pi=6 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-03-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2159-07 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Ecology and Transportation AN - 1642293521; 13536962 AB - The Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT) I-90 Snoqualmie Pass East Project has presented WSDOT engineers with many unique design challenges when integrating the ecological needs of the area with the transportation objectives of the project. The project faces issues of capacity, deteriorating concrete pavement, unstable rock slopes, and road closures associated with avalanches; there is also a real need to improve ecological connectivity of the area. I-90 is a physical barrier to the north-south movement of fish and wildlife. Wildlife attempting to cross the Interstate present a safety concern to motorists, and the barrier that I-90 forms between upstream and downstream aquatic habitats affects fish passage and hydrologic processes. To identify areas where investments in ecological connectivity should be made, WSDOT worked with dozens of agencies that manage land resources in the project area to design bridges and culverts that improve wildlife and aquatic connections. Integrating ecological objectives presented many design engineering challenges because of the project area's unfavorable construction conditions. Trade-offs and compromises between WSDOT and land resource managers were needed to find suitable solutions to problems. Issues that required compromises included eliminating scour issues while maximizing restoration areas; improving ground conditions for foundations without impacts to wetlands, endangered species, and footprint; creating habitat connections while treating stormwater; and designing bridges for clearance and connecting habitat. Show References JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Giles, Randy AU - Golbek, Scott AU - Sullivan, Amanda AU - Wood, Jerry AD - Washington State Department of Transportation, 1710 South 24th Avenue, Suite 100, Yakima, WA 98902 Y1 - 2010///0, PY - 2010 DA - 0, 2010 SP - 113 EP - 121 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2158 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Wildlife management KW - Barriers KW - Grounds KW - Land KW - Wildlife conservation KW - Clearances KW - Bridges (structures) KW - Culverts KW - Stormwater KW - Restoration KW - Ecology KW - Pavements KW - Habitats KW - Transportation KW - Roads KW - Footprints KW - Rock KW - Upstream KW - Hydrology KW - Wetlands KW - Slopes KW - Investments KW - Construction KW - Joints KW - Avalanches KW - Design engineering KW - Foundations KW - Endangered species KW - Fish KW - Concretes UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1642293521?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aenvironmentalengabstracts&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Ecology+and+Transportation&rft.au=Giles%2C+Randy%3BGolbek%2C+Scott%3BSullivan%2C+Amanda%3BWood%2C+Jerry&rft.aulast=Giles&rft.aufirst=Randy&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=2158&rft.issue=&rft.spage=113&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2158-14 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2010-11-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-05-18 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2158-14 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Hydrology and Hydraulic Analysis for a Drainage Rehabilitation Project on Interstate Highway 80 in California AN - 1430858146; 14142137 AB - The drainage systems on Interstate Highway 80 (I-80) at Emigrant Gap in California were built in 1950s. After more than 50 years of service, most of these systems are in poor conditions and need major rehabilitation. A procedure has been developed to perform hydrology and hydraulic analysis for these systems, based on information available to design engineers, including as-built plans, Geological Survey (USGS) maps, aerial images, etc. The design flood volumes are calculated using the Rational Method and the National Resources Conservation Services TR-55 method, while the hydraulic capacities of drainage systems are calculated using the software program CulvertMaster. The results show that the capacities of many culverts are reduced as a result of the proposed rehabilitation work, which is not expected by engineers who used to believe that a smoother surface might offset the reduction in cross section area on flow capacity. This paper summarizes the procedures and methods used in this project to determine the final rehabilitation treatments. JF - Watershed Management 2010: Innovations in Watershed Management under Land Use and Climate Change AU - Luo, Z AU - Peng, M AD - Office of Office Engineer, Division of Engineering Services, California Department of Transportation, MS 43, 1727 30th Street, Sacramento, CA 95816. Y1 - 2010///0, PY - 2010 DA - 0, 2010 SP - 620 EP - 630 KW - ASFA 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality; Aqualine Abstracts; Water Resources Abstracts KW - Hydraulics KW - Hydrology KW - Drainage KW - Rehabilitation KW - California KW - Highways and roads KW - Resource management KW - Climate change KW - Watershed Management KW - Freshwater KW - Maps KW - USA, California KW - Highways KW - River basin management KW - Resource conservation KW - Land use KW - Design Floods KW - Geological surveys KW - Capacity KW - Drainage Systems KW - AQ 00007:Industrial Effluents KW - SW 5080:Evaluation, processing and publication KW - Q5 08504:Effects on organisms UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1430858146?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Aaqualine&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Watershed+Management+2010%3A+Innovations+in+Watershed+Management+under+Land+Use+and+Climate+Change&rft.atitle=Hydrology+and+Hydraulic+Analysis+for+a+Drainage+Rehabilitation+Project+on+Interstate+Highway+80+in+California&rft.au=Luo%2C+Z%3BPeng%2C+M&rft.aulast=Luo&rft.aufirst=Z&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=620&rft.isbn=9780784411438&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Watershed+Management+2010%3A+Innovations+in+Watershed+Management+under+Land+Use+and+Climate+Change&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/10.1061%2F41148%28389%2957 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-09-01 N1 - Last updated - 2017-02-01 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Resource management; Resource conservation; Geological surveys; Climate change; Hydrology; River basin management; Land use; Design Floods; Hydraulics; Rehabilitation; Watershed Management; Drainage Systems; Capacity; Maps; Highways; USA, California; Freshwater DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/41148(389)57 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Mass wasting in Newfoundland and Nova Scotia; a review AN - 1020537920; 2012-055611 JF - Atlantic Geology AU - Spooner, Ian AU - Liverman, Dave AU - Catto, Norm AU - Batterson, Martin AU - McAskill, Wayne AU - Isenor, Fenton AU - Anonymous Y1 - 2010 PY - 2010 DA - 2010 SP - 68 PB - Atlantic Geoscience Society, Fredericton, NB VL - 46 SN - 0843-5561, 0843-5561 KW - Labrador KW - failures KW - geologic hazards KW - Newfoundland and Labrador KW - Cape Breton Island KW - climate change KW - Newfoundland KW - Canada KW - mass movements KW - Nova Scotia KW - natural hazards KW - Maritime Provinces KW - Eastern Canada KW - slope stability KW - land use KW - 22:Environmental geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1020537920?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ageorefmodule&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Atlantic+Geology&rft.atitle=Mass+wasting+in+Newfoundland+and+Nova+Scotia%3B+a+review&rft.au=Spooner%2C+Ian%3BLiverman%2C+Dave%3BCatto%2C+Norm%3BBatterson%2C+Martin%3BMcAskill%2C+Wayne%3BIsenor%2C+Fenton%3BAnonymous&rft.aulast=Spooner&rft.aufirst=Ian&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=&rft.spage=68&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Atlantic+Geology&rft.issn=08435561&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://journals.hil.unb.ca/index.php/ag/index LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - Atlantic Geoscience Society; 36th annual colloquium and annual general meeting 2010 N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - PubXState - NB N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-15 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Canada; Cape Breton Island; climate change; Eastern Canada; failures; geologic hazards; Labrador; land use; Maritime Provinces; mass movements; natural hazards; Newfoundland; Newfoundland and Labrador; Nova Scotia; slope stability ER -