TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133328; 14624-2_0026 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873133328?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133309; 14624-2_0023 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873133309?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133301; 14624-2_0017 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873133301?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133280; 14624-2_0014 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873133280?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873133274; 14624-2_0008 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873133274?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 40 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132751; 14624-2_0040 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873132751?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 39 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132742; 14624-2_0039 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873132742?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 28 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132702; 14624-2_0028 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873132702?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 13 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132689; 14624-2_0013 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873132689?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 29 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132291; 14624-2_0029 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873132291?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 22 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132284; 14624-2_0022 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873132284?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132269; 14624-2_0020 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873132269?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132259; 14624-2_0007 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873132259?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131852; 14624-2_0018 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873131852?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 44 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131290; 14624-2_0044 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873131290?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 43 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131272; 14624-2_0043 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873131272?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 42 of 47] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873131256; 14624-2_0042 AB - PURPOSE: A light rail extension connecting the Metro Gold Line to the Metro Blue Line and future Metro Expo Line in downtown Los Angeles, California is proposed. The Regional Connector Transit Corridor Project area encompasses approximately two square miles and is the largest regional employment center in Los Angeles County. The proposed extension would run from the current Metro Blue Line terminus at 7th Street/Metro Center Station to a point on the Metro Gold Line near the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. The boundaries of the project area extend north to the US 101 freeway, east to the Los Angeles River, south to 9th Street, and west to the SR 110 freeway. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management (TSM) alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would consists of electric trains powered by overhead wires. LRT uses conventional steel tracks, which have the flexibility to be placed in exclusive surface right-of-way, in tunnels, on elevated viaducts, in street medians, or in mixed flow traffic lanes. Metros LRT system is designed to accommodate trains of up to three 90-foot rail cars capable of speeds up to 65 miles per hour as well as street running service adhering to posted traffic speeds for automobiles. The At-Grade Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from the existing underground 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line at Temple and Alameda Streets with three new station locations. This alignment includes a combination of underground and at-grade segments, with 46 percent of the route underground. New stations would serve the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street along the alignment would be converted to a pedestrian-friendly transit mall. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would provide a direct connection from 7th Street/Metro Center Station to the Metro Gold Line tracks at the Little Tokyo/Arts District Station with three new station locations. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station beneath Flower Street to 2nd Street. The tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to a new portal on the parcel bounded by 1st Street, Alameda Street, 2nd Street, and Central Avenue. The new tracks would then connect to the tracks of the Metro Gold Line at grade. The Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative would be entirely located underground except for a single at-grade crossing at the intersection of 1st and Alameda Streets. The Fully Underground LRT Alternative is essentially the same configuration as the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, except that it provides for four new underground stations instead of three. It travels under the intersection of 1st and Alameda rather than crossing at-grade, and it then connects to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. The alignment would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street. Tracks would then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel and 2nd Street to Central Avenue. At 2nd Street and Central Avenue, the tracks would continue underground heading northeast under 1st and Alameda Streets. An underground junction would be constructed beneath the intersection of 1st Street and Alameda Street. Unlike the Underground Emphasis LRT Alternative, two portals would be needed because the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/I-605 branches of the Metro Gold Line would be located underground. The new portals would be located to the north and east of the junction, where trains would rise to the surface to connect to the Metro Gold Line heading north to Azusa and east to I-605. Capital costs of the alternatives in year of expenditure dollars range from $80.0 million for the TSM Alternative to $1.44 billion for the Fully Underground LRT Alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and create a sustainable light rail transit system for downtown Los Angeles and the surrounding region. The Regional Connector would link the spokes of the regional system so that passengers could travel cross-county through downtown Los Angeles without needing to transfer. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Temporary closure of traffic lanes would temporarily impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians and it would be necessary to prohibit on-street parking in construction zones. Permanent displacement of parking would also occur in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community in downtown Los Angeles. Implementation of the build alternatives would result in significant impacts at one to three intersections. Required easements and land acquisitions would involve significant full and partial takes of property with adverse impacts. 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). JF - EPA number: 100352, Draft EIS (Volume 1)--718 pages, Appendices (Volumes 2-8)--CD-ROM, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Easements KW - Environmental Justice KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/873131256?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 5 of 7] T2 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 853675886; 14621-100349_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of road transportation improvements within the US 18/151 (Verona Road) corridor near the cities of Madison and Fitchburg, Dane County, Wisconsin is proposed. A draft EIS released in March of 2004 addressed US 12/14 (Beltline) from Todd Drive to Mineral Point Road, and US 18/151 (Verona Road) from County PD to Nakoma Road. This supplemental EIS reduces the scope of the draft EIS by focusing on the Verona Road corridor from County PD to Nakoma Road and the Beltline from Todd Drive to Whitney Way. The current preferred alternative would involve a staged implementation of two of the alternatives presented in the DEIS. Stage 1 would entail reconstructing the current Verona Road/Beltline diamond interchange into a single-point urban interchange and extending the six-lane Beltline section west to the Whitney Way interchange. The single-point interchange aligns the Beltline ramps to meet at a single point, which allows more efficient signal operation. Four through lanes in each direction would be provided on Verona Road from Nakoma Road on Midvale Boulevard to Summit Road to increase capacity. A jug-handle grade-separated intersection would be constructed within the existing right-of-way of the current Summit Road intersection. Carling Drive would be extended to the north and would connect with Allied Drive to provide one additional connection between the Nakoma Heights area and the Allied neighborhood. Additionally, a connection would be provided underneath Verona Road that connects the Carling Drive extension to Freeport Road. This connection would use Verona Roads existing railroad bridge to travel underneath Verona Road. As part of Stage 2, the County PD and Verona Road intersection would be converted to a diamond interchange and a third lane in both directions on Verona Road from the County PD interchange through the Williamsburg Way intersection to the Raymond Road intersection would be added. Additionally, sidewalks would be constructed on the north and south sides of County PD. The Military Ridge Trail would be reconstructed within the existing Verona Road right-of-way and cross County PD immediately east of the interchange. Stage 3 would be constructed when operation and safety needs warrant the infrastructure investment. It is anticipated this will occur near 2030. Stage 3 would separate local traffic from metropolitan and regional traffic by providing a depressed freeway down the center of Verona Road. A US 151 freeflow system interchange with depressed US 151 ramps would be constructed east of the Verona Road Single-Point interchange. Respective costs for the three stages are $89.7 million to $91.7 million, $51.3 million to $52.8 million, and $337.2 million to $344.6 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed long-term improvements would serve this portion of the Madison metropolitan area and the state backbone system for decades. The project would enhance the mobility of both motorized and, due to the provision of bicycle/pedestrian lanes, nonmotorized travel in the US 151 and US 12/14 corridors. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 23.4 acres of new right-of-way would result in displacement of 65 residential and 35 to 37 businesses for all stages. The cohesion of several neighborhoods would be affected somewhat, and impacts to minority and low-income populations would be disproportionate. The study corridor contains or is adjacent to 25 hazardous materials 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 04-0440D, Volume 28, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100349, Supplemental Draft EIS (Volume 1)--414 pages and maps, Appendice (Volume 2)--592 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WIS-EIS-03-02-SD KW - Environmental Justice KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675886?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&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 - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 1 of 7] T2 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 853675880; 14621-100349_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of road transportation improvements within the US 18/151 (Verona Road) corridor near the cities of Madison and Fitchburg, Dane County, Wisconsin is proposed. A draft EIS released in March of 2004 addressed US 12/14 (Beltline) from Todd Drive to Mineral Point Road, and US 18/151 (Verona Road) from County PD to Nakoma Road. This supplemental EIS reduces the scope of the draft EIS by focusing on the Verona Road corridor from County PD to Nakoma Road and the Beltline from Todd Drive to Whitney Way. The current preferred alternative would involve a staged implementation of two of the alternatives presented in the DEIS. Stage 1 would entail reconstructing the current Verona Road/Beltline diamond interchange into a single-point urban interchange and extending the six-lane Beltline section west to the Whitney Way interchange. The single-point interchange aligns the Beltline ramps to meet at a single point, which allows more efficient signal operation. Four through lanes in each direction would be provided on Verona Road from Nakoma Road on Midvale Boulevard to Summit Road to increase capacity. A jug-handle grade-separated intersection would be constructed within the existing right-of-way of the current Summit Road intersection. Carling Drive would be extended to the north and would connect with Allied Drive to provide one additional connection between the Nakoma Heights area and the Allied neighborhood. Additionally, a connection would be provided underneath Verona Road that connects the Carling Drive extension to Freeport Road. This connection would use Verona Roads existing railroad bridge to travel underneath Verona Road. As part of Stage 2, the County PD and Verona Road intersection would be converted to a diamond interchange and a third lane in both directions on Verona Road from the County PD interchange through the Williamsburg Way intersection to the Raymond Road intersection would be added. Additionally, sidewalks would be constructed on the north and south sides of County PD. The Military Ridge Trail would be reconstructed within the existing Verona Road right-of-way and cross County PD immediately east of the interchange. Stage 3 would be constructed when operation and safety needs warrant the infrastructure investment. It is anticipated this will occur near 2030. Stage 3 would separate local traffic from metropolitan and regional traffic by providing a depressed freeway down the center of Verona Road. A US 151 freeflow system interchange with depressed US 151 ramps would be constructed east of the Verona Road Single-Point interchange. Respective costs for the three stages are $89.7 million to $91.7 million, $51.3 million to $52.8 million, and $337.2 million to $344.6 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed long-term improvements would serve this portion of the Madison metropolitan area and the state backbone system for decades. The project would enhance the mobility of both motorized and, due to the provision of bicycle/pedestrian lanes, nonmotorized travel in the US 151 and US 12/14 corridors. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 23.4 acres of new right-of-way would result in displacement of 65 residential and 35 to 37 businesses for all stages. The cohesion of several neighborhoods would be affected somewhat, and impacts to minority and low-income populations would be disproportionate. The study corridor contains or is adjacent to 25 hazardous materials 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 04-0440D, Volume 28, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100349, Supplemental Draft EIS (Volume 1)--414 pages and maps, Appendice (Volume 2)--592 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WIS-EIS-03-02-SD KW - Environmental Justice KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675880?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&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 - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 6 of 7] T2 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 853675666; 14621-100349_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of road transportation improvements within the US 18/151 (Verona Road) corridor near the cities of Madison and Fitchburg, Dane County, Wisconsin is proposed. A draft EIS released in March of 2004 addressed US 12/14 (Beltline) from Todd Drive to Mineral Point Road, and US 18/151 (Verona Road) from County PD to Nakoma Road. This supplemental EIS reduces the scope of the draft EIS by focusing on the Verona Road corridor from County PD to Nakoma Road and the Beltline from Todd Drive to Whitney Way. The current preferred alternative would involve a staged implementation of two of the alternatives presented in the DEIS. Stage 1 would entail reconstructing the current Verona Road/Beltline diamond interchange into a single-point urban interchange and extending the six-lane Beltline section west to the Whitney Way interchange. The single-point interchange aligns the Beltline ramps to meet at a single point, which allows more efficient signal operation. Four through lanes in each direction would be provided on Verona Road from Nakoma Road on Midvale Boulevard to Summit Road to increase capacity. A jug-handle grade-separated intersection would be constructed within the existing right-of-way of the current Summit Road intersection. Carling Drive would be extended to the north and would connect with Allied Drive to provide one additional connection between the Nakoma Heights area and the Allied neighborhood. Additionally, a connection would be provided underneath Verona Road that connects the Carling Drive extension to Freeport Road. This connection would use Verona Roads existing railroad bridge to travel underneath Verona Road. As part of Stage 2, the County PD and Verona Road intersection would be converted to a diamond interchange and a third lane in both directions on Verona Road from the County PD interchange through the Williamsburg Way intersection to the Raymond Road intersection would be added. Additionally, sidewalks would be constructed on the north and south sides of County PD. The Military Ridge Trail would be reconstructed within the existing Verona Road right-of-way and cross County PD immediately east of the interchange. Stage 3 would be constructed when operation and safety needs warrant the infrastructure investment. It is anticipated this will occur near 2030. Stage 3 would separate local traffic from metropolitan and regional traffic by providing a depressed freeway down the center of Verona Road. A US 151 freeflow system interchange with depressed US 151 ramps would be constructed east of the Verona Road Single-Point interchange. Respective costs for the three stages are $89.7 million to $91.7 million, $51.3 million to $52.8 million, and $337.2 million to $344.6 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed long-term improvements would serve this portion of the Madison metropolitan area and the state backbone system for decades. The project would enhance the mobility of both motorized and, due to the provision of bicycle/pedestrian lanes, nonmotorized travel in the US 151 and US 12/14 corridors. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 23.4 acres of new right-of-way would result in displacement of 65 residential and 35 to 37 businesses for all stages. The cohesion of several neighborhoods would be affected somewhat, and impacts to minority and low-income populations would be disproportionate. The study corridor contains or is adjacent to 25 hazardous materials 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 04-0440D, Volume 28, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100349, Supplemental Draft EIS (Volume 1)--414 pages and maps, Appendice (Volume 2)--592 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WIS-EIS-03-02-SD KW - Environmental Justice KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675666?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&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 - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 2 of 7] T2 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 853675661; 14621-100349_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of road transportation improvements within the US 18/151 (Verona Road) corridor near the cities of Madison and Fitchburg, Dane County, Wisconsin is proposed. A draft EIS released in March of 2004 addressed US 12/14 (Beltline) from Todd Drive to Mineral Point Road, and US 18/151 (Verona Road) from County PD to Nakoma Road. This supplemental EIS reduces the scope of the draft EIS by focusing on the Verona Road corridor from County PD to Nakoma Road and the Beltline from Todd Drive to Whitney Way. The current preferred alternative would involve a staged implementation of two of the alternatives presented in the DEIS. Stage 1 would entail reconstructing the current Verona Road/Beltline diamond interchange into a single-point urban interchange and extending the six-lane Beltline section west to the Whitney Way interchange. The single-point interchange aligns the Beltline ramps to meet at a single point, which allows more efficient signal operation. Four through lanes in each direction would be provided on Verona Road from Nakoma Road on Midvale Boulevard to Summit Road to increase capacity. A jug-handle grade-separated intersection would be constructed within the existing right-of-way of the current Summit Road intersection. Carling Drive would be extended to the north and would connect with Allied Drive to provide one additional connection between the Nakoma Heights area and the Allied neighborhood. Additionally, a connection would be provided underneath Verona Road that connects the Carling Drive extension to Freeport Road. This connection would use Verona Roads existing railroad bridge to travel underneath Verona Road. As part of Stage 2, the County PD and Verona Road intersection would be converted to a diamond interchange and a third lane in both directions on Verona Road from the County PD interchange through the Williamsburg Way intersection to the Raymond Road intersection would be added. Additionally, sidewalks would be constructed on the north and south sides of County PD. The Military Ridge Trail would be reconstructed within the existing Verona Road right-of-way and cross County PD immediately east of the interchange. Stage 3 would be constructed when operation and safety needs warrant the infrastructure investment. It is anticipated this will occur near 2030. Stage 3 would separate local traffic from metropolitan and regional traffic by providing a depressed freeway down the center of Verona Road. A US 151 freeflow system interchange with depressed US 151 ramps would be constructed east of the Verona Road Single-Point interchange. Respective costs for the three stages are $89.7 million to $91.7 million, $51.3 million to $52.8 million, and $337.2 million to $344.6 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed long-term improvements would serve this portion of the Madison metropolitan area and the state backbone system for decades. The project would enhance the mobility of both motorized and, due to the provision of bicycle/pedestrian lanes, nonmotorized travel in the US 151 and US 12/14 corridors. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 23.4 acres of new right-of-way would result in displacement of 65 residential and 35 to 37 businesses for all stages. The cohesion of several neighborhoods would be affected somewhat, and impacts to minority and low-income populations would be disproportionate. The study corridor contains or is adjacent to 25 hazardous materials 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 04-0440D, Volume 28, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100349, Supplemental Draft EIS (Volume 1)--414 pages and maps, Appendice (Volume 2)--592 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WIS-EIS-03-02-SD KW - Environmental Justice KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675661?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&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 - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 4 of 7] T2 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 853675604; 14621-100349_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of road transportation improvements within the US 18/151 (Verona Road) corridor near the cities of Madison and Fitchburg, Dane County, Wisconsin is proposed. A draft EIS released in March of 2004 addressed US 12/14 (Beltline) from Todd Drive to Mineral Point Road, and US 18/151 (Verona Road) from County PD to Nakoma Road. This supplemental EIS reduces the scope of the draft EIS by focusing on the Verona Road corridor from County PD to Nakoma Road and the Beltline from Todd Drive to Whitney Way. The current preferred alternative would involve a staged implementation of two of the alternatives presented in the DEIS. Stage 1 would entail reconstructing the current Verona Road/Beltline diamond interchange into a single-point urban interchange and extending the six-lane Beltline section west to the Whitney Way interchange. The single-point interchange aligns the Beltline ramps to meet at a single point, which allows more efficient signal operation. Four through lanes in each direction would be provided on Verona Road from Nakoma Road on Midvale Boulevard to Summit Road to increase capacity. A jug-handle grade-separated intersection would be constructed within the existing right-of-way of the current Summit Road intersection. Carling Drive would be extended to the north and would connect with Allied Drive to provide one additional connection between the Nakoma Heights area and the Allied neighborhood. Additionally, a connection would be provided underneath Verona Road that connects the Carling Drive extension to Freeport Road. This connection would use Verona Roads existing railroad bridge to travel underneath Verona Road. As part of Stage 2, the County PD and Verona Road intersection would be converted to a diamond interchange and a third lane in both directions on Verona Road from the County PD interchange through the Williamsburg Way intersection to the Raymond Road intersection would be added. Additionally, sidewalks would be constructed on the north and south sides of County PD. The Military Ridge Trail would be reconstructed within the existing Verona Road right-of-way and cross County PD immediately east of the interchange. Stage 3 would be constructed when operation and safety needs warrant the infrastructure investment. It is anticipated this will occur near 2030. Stage 3 would separate local traffic from metropolitan and regional traffic by providing a depressed freeway down the center of Verona Road. A US 151 freeflow system interchange with depressed US 151 ramps would be constructed east of the Verona Road Single-Point interchange. Respective costs for the three stages are $89.7 million to $91.7 million, $51.3 million to $52.8 million, and $337.2 million to $344.6 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed long-term improvements would serve this portion of the Madison metropolitan area and the state backbone system for decades. The project would enhance the mobility of both motorized and, due to the provision of bicycle/pedestrian lanes, nonmotorized travel in the US 151 and US 12/14 corridors. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 23.4 acres of new right-of-way would result in displacement of 65 residential and 35 to 37 businesses for all stages. The cohesion of several neighborhoods would be affected somewhat, and impacts to minority and low-income populations would be disproportionate. The study corridor contains or is adjacent to 25 hazardous materials 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 04-0440D, Volume 28, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100349, Supplemental Draft EIS (Volume 1)--414 pages and maps, Appendice (Volume 2)--592 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WIS-EIS-03-02-SD KW - Environmental Justice KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675604?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&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 - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 3 of 7] T2 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 853675601; 14621-100349_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of road transportation improvements within the US 18/151 (Verona Road) corridor near the cities of Madison and Fitchburg, Dane County, Wisconsin is proposed. A draft EIS released in March of 2004 addressed US 12/14 (Beltline) from Todd Drive to Mineral Point Road, and US 18/151 (Verona Road) from County PD to Nakoma Road. This supplemental EIS reduces the scope of the draft EIS by focusing on the Verona Road corridor from County PD to Nakoma Road and the Beltline from Todd Drive to Whitney Way. The current preferred alternative would involve a staged implementation of two of the alternatives presented in the DEIS. Stage 1 would entail reconstructing the current Verona Road/Beltline diamond interchange into a single-point urban interchange and extending the six-lane Beltline section west to the Whitney Way interchange. The single-point interchange aligns the Beltline ramps to meet at a single point, which allows more efficient signal operation. Four through lanes in each direction would be provided on Verona Road from Nakoma Road on Midvale Boulevard to Summit Road to increase capacity. A jug-handle grade-separated intersection would be constructed within the existing right-of-way of the current Summit Road intersection. Carling Drive would be extended to the north and would connect with Allied Drive to provide one additional connection between the Nakoma Heights area and the Allied neighborhood. Additionally, a connection would be provided underneath Verona Road that connects the Carling Drive extension to Freeport Road. This connection would use Verona Roads existing railroad bridge to travel underneath Verona Road. As part of Stage 2, the County PD and Verona Road intersection would be converted to a diamond interchange and a third lane in both directions on Verona Road from the County PD interchange through the Williamsburg Way intersection to the Raymond Road intersection would be added. Additionally, sidewalks would be constructed on the north and south sides of County PD. The Military Ridge Trail would be reconstructed within the existing Verona Road right-of-way and cross County PD immediately east of the interchange. Stage 3 would be constructed when operation and safety needs warrant the infrastructure investment. It is anticipated this will occur near 2030. Stage 3 would separate local traffic from metropolitan and regional traffic by providing a depressed freeway down the center of Verona Road. A US 151 freeflow system interchange with depressed US 151 ramps would be constructed east of the Verona Road Single-Point interchange. Respective costs for the three stages are $89.7 million to $91.7 million, $51.3 million to $52.8 million, and $337.2 million to $344.6 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed long-term improvements would serve this portion of the Madison metropolitan area and the state backbone system for decades. The project would enhance the mobility of both motorized and, due to the provision of bicycle/pedestrian lanes, nonmotorized travel in the US 151 and US 12/14 corridors. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 23.4 acres of new right-of-way would result in displacement of 65 residential and 35 to 37 businesses for all stages. The cohesion of several neighborhoods would be affected somewhat, and impacts to minority and low-income populations would be disproportionate. The study corridor contains or is adjacent to 25 hazardous materials 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 04-0440D, Volume 28, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100349, Supplemental Draft EIS (Volume 1)--414 pages and maps, Appendice (Volume 2)--592 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WIS-EIS-03-02-SD KW - Environmental Justice KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675601?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&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 - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). [Part 7 of 7] T2 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 853675589; 14621-100349_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of road transportation improvements within the US 18/151 (Verona Road) corridor near the cities of Madison and Fitchburg, Dane County, Wisconsin is proposed. A draft EIS released in March of 2004 addressed US 12/14 (Beltline) from Todd Drive to Mineral Point Road, and US 18/151 (Verona Road) from County PD to Nakoma Road. This supplemental EIS reduces the scope of the draft EIS by focusing on the Verona Road corridor from County PD to Nakoma Road and the Beltline from Todd Drive to Whitney Way. The current preferred alternative would involve a staged implementation of two of the alternatives presented in the DEIS. Stage 1 would entail reconstructing the current Verona Road/Beltline diamond interchange into a single-point urban interchange and extending the six-lane Beltline section west to the Whitney Way interchange. The single-point interchange aligns the Beltline ramps to meet at a single point, which allows more efficient signal operation. Four through lanes in each direction would be provided on Verona Road from Nakoma Road on Midvale Boulevard to Summit Road to increase capacity. A jug-handle grade-separated intersection would be constructed within the existing right-of-way of the current Summit Road intersection. Carling Drive would be extended to the north and would connect with Allied Drive to provide one additional connection between the Nakoma Heights area and the Allied neighborhood. Additionally, a connection would be provided underneath Verona Road that connects the Carling Drive extension to Freeport Road. This connection would use Verona Roads existing railroad bridge to travel underneath Verona Road. As part of Stage 2, the County PD and Verona Road intersection would be converted to a diamond interchange and a third lane in both directions on Verona Road from the County PD interchange through the Williamsburg Way intersection to the Raymond Road intersection would be added. Additionally, sidewalks would be constructed on the north and south sides of County PD. The Military Ridge Trail would be reconstructed within the existing Verona Road right-of-way and cross County PD immediately east of the interchange. Stage 3 would be constructed when operation and safety needs warrant the infrastructure investment. It is anticipated this will occur near 2030. Stage 3 would separate local traffic from metropolitan and regional traffic by providing a depressed freeway down the center of Verona Road. A US 151 freeflow system interchange with depressed US 151 ramps would be constructed east of the Verona Road Single-Point interchange. Respective costs for the three stages are $89.7 million to $91.7 million, $51.3 million to $52.8 million, and $337.2 million to $344.6 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed long-term improvements would serve this portion of the Madison metropolitan area and the state backbone system for decades. The project would enhance the mobility of both motorized and, due to the provision of bicycle/pedestrian lanes, nonmotorized travel in the US 151 and US 12/14 corridors. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 23.4 acres of new right-of-way would result in displacement of 65 residential and 35 to 37 businesses for all stages. The cohesion of several neighborhoods would be affected somewhat, and impacts to minority and low-income populations would be disproportionate. The study corridor contains or is adjacent to 25 hazardous materials 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 04-0440D, Volume 28, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100349, Supplemental Draft EIS (Volume 1)--414 pages and maps, Appendice (Volume 2)--592 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WIS-EIS-03-02-SD KW - Environmental Justice KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/853675589?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&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 - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US HIGHWAY 18/151 (VERONA ROAD) AND US HIGHWAY 12/14 (BELTLINE) CORRIDORS, DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MARCH 2004). AN - 758977488; 14621 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of road transportation improvements within the US 18/151 (Verona Road) corridor near the cities of Madison and Fitchburg, Dane County, Wisconsin is proposed. A draft EIS released in March of 2004 addressed US 12/14 (Beltline) from Todd Drive to Mineral Point Road, and US 18/151 (Verona Road) from County PD to Nakoma Road. This supplemental EIS reduces the scope of the draft EIS by focusing on the Verona Road corridor from County PD to Nakoma Road and the Beltline from Todd Drive to Whitney Way. The current preferred alternative would involve a staged implementation of two of the alternatives presented in the DEIS. Stage 1 would entail reconstructing the current Verona Road/Beltline diamond interchange into a single-point urban interchange and extending the six-lane Beltline section west to the Whitney Way interchange. The single-point interchange aligns the Beltline ramps to meet at a single point, which allows more efficient signal operation. Four through lanes in each direction would be provided on Verona Road from Nakoma Road on Midvale Boulevard to Summit Road to increase capacity. A jug-handle grade-separated intersection would be constructed within the existing right-of-way of the current Summit Road intersection. Carling Drive would be extended to the north and would connect with Allied Drive to provide one additional connection between the Nakoma Heights area and the Allied neighborhood. Additionally, a connection would be provided underneath Verona Road that connects the Carling Drive extension to Freeport Road. This connection would use Verona Roads existing railroad bridge to travel underneath Verona Road. As part of Stage 2, the County PD and Verona Road intersection would be converted to a diamond interchange and a third lane in both directions on Verona Road from the County PD interchange through the Williamsburg Way intersection to the Raymond Road intersection would be added. Additionally, sidewalks would be constructed on the north and south sides of County PD. The Military Ridge Trail would be reconstructed within the existing Verona Road right-of-way and cross County PD immediately east of the interchange. Stage 3 would be constructed when operation and safety needs warrant the infrastructure investment. It is anticipated this will occur near 2030. Stage 3 would separate local traffic from metropolitan and regional traffic by providing a depressed freeway down the center of Verona Road. A US 151 freeflow system interchange with depressed US 151 ramps would be constructed east of the Verona Road Single-Point interchange. Respective costs for the three stages are $89.7 million to $91.7 million, $51.3 million to $52.8 million, and $337.2 million to $344.6 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed long-term improvements would serve this portion of the Madison metropolitan area and the state backbone system for decades. The project would enhance the mobility of both motorized and, due to the provision of bicycle/pedestrian lanes, nonmotorized travel in the US 151 and US 12/14 corridors. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of 23.4 acres of new right-of-way would result in displacement of 65 residential and 35 to 37 businesses for all stages. The cohesion of several neighborhoods would be affected somewhat, and impacts to minority and low-income populations would be disproportionate. The study corridor contains or is adjacent to 25 hazardous materials 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 04-0440D, Volume 28, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100349, Supplemental Draft EIS (Volume 1)--414 pages and maps, Appendice (Volume 2)--592 pages, August 27, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WIS-EIS-03-02-SD KW - Environmental Justice KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Minorities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wisconsin KW - Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/758977488?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&rft.title=US+HIGHWAY+18%2F151+%28VERONA+ROAD%29+AND+US+HIGHWAY+12%2F14+%28BELTLINE%29+CORRIDORS%2C+DANE+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MARCH+2004%29.&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 - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 27, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 80/INTERSTATE 680/STATE ROUTE 12 INTERCHANGE PROJECT, SOLANO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - INTERSTATE 80/INTERSTATE 680/STATE ROUTE 12 INTERCHANGE PROJECT, SOLANO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132829; 14614-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of roadway widening and interchange improvements along Interstate 80 (I-80)/Interstate 680 (I-680)/State Route 12 (SR 12) in the vicinity of the city of Fairfield, Solano County, California is proposed. The existing I-80/I-680/SR 12 interchange complex was constructed approximately 40 years ago, and current traffic demands result in congestion, delays, and unacceptable levels of service. The project area covers 13 miles encompassing all three highways and the proposed action involves improvements on a 4.5-mile-long segment of I-80 between Red Top Road and Abernathy Road, an approximate 3.5-mile-long segment of I-680 between Gold Hill Road and I-80, a 2.0-mile-long segment of SR 12 West (SR 12W) between 0.5 mile west of Red Top Road and I-80, and a 2.5-mile-long segment of SR 12 East (SR 12E) between I-80 and Main Street in Suisun City. The alternatives analyzed in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative and two full build alternatives (Alternative B and Alternative C), each with a corresponding fundable the first phase (Alternative B, Phase 1 and Alternative C, Phase 1). Alternatives B and C would address comprehensive improvements to the I-80/I-680/SR 12W interchange; the widening of I-680 and I-80; and the relocation, upgrade, and expansion of the westbound truck scales on I-80. Alternatives B and C differ primarily in the location of the I-80/I-680/SR 12W interchange improvements and the improvements on SR 12E. Under Alternative B, the I-80/I-680 and I-80/SR 12W interchanges would be improved in place and a single interchange would be constructed on SR 12E to serve Beck Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue. Under Alternative C, I-680 would be realigned to the west to connect with the I-80/SR 12W interchange, and two interchanges would be constructed on SR 12E to serve Beck Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue. Alternative B, Phase 1 would improve the I-80/Green Valley Road, I-80/I-680, I-80/Suisun Valley Road and the SR 12E/Beck Avenue interchanges. Alternative C, Phase 1 would realign I-680 to the west to connect with the I-80/SR 12W interchange and provide direct connections between all highways except eastbound SR 12W and southbound I-680. Red Top Road would be extended to meet Business Center Drive and interchanges at SR 12W/Red Top Road, I-80/Red Top Road, I-80/Green Valley Road, and I-680/Red Top Road would be constructed or improved. A third lane would be added to SR 12 East from west of Chadbourne Road Undercrossing to the Webster Street exit. While the fundable first phases of the alternatives would not address all project needs, they would reduce congestion and cut-through traffic on local roads, and improve safety conditions. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ease traffic congestion through the I-80/I-680/SR12 interchange complex, encourage the use of high-occupancy vehicle lanes and ridesharing, accommodate projected growth, and improve safety. The amount of cut-through traffic on local roads would be reduced and inspection and enforcement at truck scales would be facilitated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require conversion of approximately 200 acres of farmland. Construction activities would create potential for sediment or pollutants to enter waterways. The full build of Alternative B would displace one residence and require 201 partial and 27 full acquisitions of businesses. The full build of Alternative C would displace one residence and require 144 partial and 32 full acquisitions of businesses. 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: 100342, Volume 1 --876 pages and maps, Volume 2--231 oversize maps, August 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation 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/873132829?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+80%2FINTERSTATE+680%2FSTATE+ROUTE+12+INTERCHANGE+PROJECT%2C+SOLANO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+80%2FINTERSTATE+680%2FSTATE+ROUTE+12+INTERCHANGE+PROJECT%2C+SOLANO+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: August 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 80/INTERSTATE 680/STATE ROUTE 12 INTERCHANGE PROJECT, SOLANO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - INTERSTATE 80/INTERSTATE 680/STATE ROUTE 12 INTERCHANGE PROJECT, SOLANO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 873132348; 14614-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of roadway widening and interchange improvements along Interstate 80 (I-80)/Interstate 680 (I-680)/State Route 12 (SR 12) in the vicinity of the city of Fairfield, Solano County, California is proposed. The existing I-80/I-680/SR 12 interchange complex was constructed approximately 40 years ago, and current traffic demands result in congestion, delays, and unacceptable levels of service. The project area covers 13 miles encompassing all three highways and the proposed action involves improvements on a 4.5-mile-long segment of I-80 between Red Top Road and Abernathy Road, an approximate 3.5-mile-long segment of I-680 between Gold Hill Road and I-80, a 2.0-mile-long segment of SR 12 West (SR 12W) between 0.5 mile west of Red Top Road and I-80, and a 2.5-mile-long segment of SR 12 East (SR 12E) between I-80 and Main Street in Suisun City. The alternatives analyzed in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative and two full build alternatives (Alternative B and Alternative C), each with a corresponding fundable the first phase (Alternative B, Phase 1 and Alternative C, Phase 1). Alternatives B and C would address comprehensive improvements to the I-80/I-680/SR 12W interchange; the widening of I-680 and I-80; and the relocation, upgrade, and expansion of the westbound truck scales on I-80. Alternatives B and C differ primarily in the location of the I-80/I-680/SR 12W interchange improvements and the improvements on SR 12E. Under Alternative B, the I-80/I-680 and I-80/SR 12W interchanges would be improved in place and a single interchange would be constructed on SR 12E to serve Beck Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue. Under Alternative C, I-680 would be realigned to the west to connect with the I-80/SR 12W interchange, and two interchanges would be constructed on SR 12E to serve Beck Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue. Alternative B, Phase 1 would improve the I-80/Green Valley Road, I-80/I-680, I-80/Suisun Valley Road and the SR 12E/Beck Avenue interchanges. Alternative C, Phase 1 would realign I-680 to the west to connect with the I-80/SR 12W interchange and provide direct connections between all highways except eastbound SR 12W and southbound I-680. Red Top Road would be extended to meet Business Center Drive and interchanges at SR 12W/Red Top Road, I-80/Red Top Road, I-80/Green Valley Road, and I-680/Red Top Road would be constructed or improved. A third lane would be added to SR 12 East from west of Chadbourne Road Undercrossing to the Webster Street exit. While the fundable first phases of the alternatives would not address all project needs, they would reduce congestion and cut-through traffic on local roads, and improve safety conditions. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ease traffic congestion through the I-80/I-680/SR12 interchange complex, encourage the use of high-occupancy vehicle lanes and ridesharing, accommodate projected growth, and improve safety. The amount of cut-through traffic on local roads would be reduced and inspection and enforcement at truck scales would be facilitated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require conversion of approximately 200 acres of farmland. Construction activities would create potential for sediment or pollutants to enter waterways. The full build of Alternative B would displace one residence and require 201 partial and 27 full acquisitions of businesses. The full build of Alternative C would displace one residence and require 144 partial and 32 full acquisitions of businesses. 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: 100342, Volume 1 --876 pages and maps, Volume 2--231 oversize maps, August 25, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation 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/873132348?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+80%2FINTERSTATE+680%2FSTATE+ROUTE+12+INTERCHANGE+PROJECT%2C+SOLANO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+80%2FINTERSTATE+680%2FSTATE+ROUTE+12+INTERCHANGE+PROJECT%2C+SOLANO+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: August 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 80/INTERSTATE 680/STATE ROUTE 12 INTERCHANGE PROJECT, SOLANO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 758977842; 14614 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of roadway widening and interchange improvements along Interstate 80 (I-80)/Interstate 680 (I-680)/State Route 12 (SR 12) in the vicinity of the city of Fairfield, Solano County, California is proposed. The existing I-80/I-680/SR 12 interchange complex was constructed approximately 40 years ago, and current traffic demands result in congestion, delays, and unacceptable levels of service. The project area covers 13 miles encompassing all three highways and the proposed action involves improvements on a 4.5-mile-long segment of I-80 between Red Top Road and Abernathy Road, an approximate 3.5-mile-long segment of I-680 between Gold Hill Road and I-80, a 2.0-mile-long segment of SR 12 West (SR 12W) between 0.5 mile west of Red Top Road and I-80, and a 2.5-mile-long segment of SR 12 East (SR 12E) between I-80 and Main Street in Suisun City. The alternatives analyzed in this draft EIS include a No Build Alternative and two full build alternatives (Alternative B and Alternative C), each with a corresponding fundable the first phase (Alternative B, Phase 1 and Alternative C, Phase 1). Alternatives B and C would address comprehensive improvements to the I-80/I-680/SR 12W interchange; the widening of I-680 and I-80; and the relocation, upgrade, and expansion of the westbound truck scales on I-80. Alternatives B and C differ primarily in the location of the I-80/I-680/SR 12W interchange improvements and the improvements on SR 12E. Under Alternative B, the I-80/I-680 and I-80/SR 12W interchanges would be improved in place and a single interchange would be constructed on SR 12E to serve Beck Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue. Under Alternative C, I-680 would be realigned to the west to connect with the I-80/SR 12W interchange, and two interchanges would be constructed on SR 12E to serve Beck Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue. Alternative B, Phase 1 would improve the I-80/Green Valley Road, I-80/I-680, I-80/Suisun Valley Road and the SR 12E/Beck Avenue interchanges. Alternative C, Phase 1 would realign I-680 to the west to connect with the I-80/SR 12W interchange and provide direct connections between all highways except eastbound SR 12W and southbound I-680. Red Top Road would be extended to meet Business Center Drive and interchanges at SR 12W/Red Top Road, I-80/Red Top Road, I-80/Green Valley Road, and I-680/Red Top Road would be constructed or improved. A third lane would be added to SR 12 East from west of Chadbourne Road Undercrossing to the Webster Street exit. While the fundable first phases of the alternatives would not address all project needs, they would reduce congestion and cut-through traffic on local roads, and improve safety conditions. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ease traffic congestion through the I-80/I-680/SR12 interchange complex, encourage the use of high-occupancy vehicle lanes and ridesharing, accommodate projected growth, and improve safety. The amount of cut-through traffic on local roads would be reduced and inspection and enforcement at truck scales would be facilitated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would require conversion of approximately 200 acres of farmland. Construction activities would create potential for sediment or pollutants to enter waterways. The full build of Alternative B would displace one residence and require 201 partial and 27 full acquisitions of businesses. The full build of Alternative C would displace one residence and require 144 partial and 32 full acquisitions of businesses. 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: 100342, Volume 1 --876 pages and maps, Volume 2--231 oversize maps, August 25, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation 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/758977842?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2010-08-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+80%2FINTERSTATE+680%2FSTATE+ROUTE+12+INTERCHANGE+PROJECT%2C+SOLANO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+80%2FINTERSTATE+680%2FSTATE+ROUTE+12+INTERCHANGE+PROJECT%2C+SOLANO+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: August 25, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CATTLE POINT ROAD REALIGNMENT PROJECT, SAN JUAN ISLAND NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK AND CATTLE POINT NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION AREA, SAN JUAN COUNTY, WASHINGTON. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - CATTLE POINT ROAD REALIGNMENT PROJECT, SAN JUAN ISLAND NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK AND CATTLE POINT NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION AREA, SAN JUAN COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 873129795; 14613-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The realignment of a portion of the Cattle Point Road located in the San Juan Island National Historical Park and Cattle Point Natural Resources Conservation Area about eight miles south of Friday Harbor, San Juan County, Washington is proposed. Approximately 500 feet of the Cattle Point Road is threatened by coastal erosion. Coastal wind and wave action is eroding the base of the bluff that supports the road. At current estimated rates of erosion, the bluff would become a concern for roadway failure in about 16 years; however, a large storm event could cause more rapid erosion. Cattle Point Road provides the only road access to the Cattle Point area, which includes lands within the park as well as state and privately-owned land on the southeast tip of the island. The road allows pedestrians, bicyclists, and visitors traveling by vehicle to enjoy the features of the area. It is also the only road access to private property at the southeast tip of the island, which is home to approximately 270 residents. The road is classified as a rural major collector. The portion of road in the project area is owned and maintained by San Juan County. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternatives to safely move the road away from the threatened area would require the construction of approximately 2,800 feet to 4,900 feet of new road. Alternative B, Hybrid Mid-Slope Realignment, is the preferred alternative. Alternative C would involve a short realignment to the north of the existing road almost entirely within a bored tunnel to reduce the visual impacts of the realignment. Under Alternative D, a mid-slope realignment to the north of the existing road would utilize a short tunnel to lower the road profile through the top of the ridgeline. Construction costs for the realignment alternatives B, C, and D are estimated at $5 to $8 million, $55 to $65 million, and $30 to $40 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Realignment of the road away from the eroding bluff would maintain vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian road access to the Cattle Point area through the San Juan Island National Historical Park and would continue to provide a safe and pleasant roadway experience for residents and visitors without the threat of road failure from coastal erosion. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would result in 17 acres of temporary soil disturbance, 13 acres of which would be restored and revegetated. Four acres of new area would be covered by impermeable road surface, but three acres would be recovered from the abandoned road section. Wildlife and bird species would be displaced by ground disturbing activities. The Mt. Finlayson Trail would be directly impacted by the realignment. Long term adverse visual impacts of the new road alignment when viewed from the Cattle Point peninsula, offshore, and from neighboring islands would be moderate. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100341, 302 pages and maps, August 23, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Parks, Refuges and Forests KW - Agency number: FHWA WA PLD SAJH 10(1) KW - Coastal Zones KW - Erosion KW - National Parks KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Scenic Areas KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - San Juan Island National Historical Park KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129795?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CATTLE POINT ROAD REALIGNMENT PROJECT, SAN JUAN ISLAND NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK AND CATTLE POINT NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION AREA, SAN JUAN COUNTY, WASHINGTON. AN - 758977847; 14613 AB - PURPOSE: The realignment of a portion of the Cattle Point Road located in the San Juan Island National Historical Park and Cattle Point Natural Resources Conservation Area about eight miles south of Friday Harbor, San Juan County, Washington is proposed. Approximately 500 feet of the Cattle Point Road is threatened by coastal erosion. Coastal wind and wave action is eroding the base of the bluff that supports the road. At current estimated rates of erosion, the bluff would become a concern for roadway failure in about 16 years; however, a large storm event could cause more rapid erosion. Cattle Point Road provides the only road access to the Cattle Point area, which includes lands within the park as well as state and privately-owned land on the southeast tip of the island. The road allows pedestrians, bicyclists, and visitors traveling by vehicle to enjoy the features of the area. It is also the only road access to private property at the southeast tip of the island, which is home to approximately 270 residents. The road is classified as a rural major collector. The portion of road in the project area is owned and maintained by San Juan County. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are evaluated in this draft EIS. Alternatives to safely move the road away from the threatened area would require the construction of approximately 2,800 feet to 4,900 feet of new road. Alternative B, Hybrid Mid-Slope Realignment, is the preferred alternative. Alternative C would involve a short realignment to the north of the existing road almost entirely within a bored tunnel to reduce the visual impacts of the realignment. Under Alternative D, a mid-slope realignment to the north of the existing road would utilize a short tunnel to lower the road profile through the top of the ridgeline. Construction costs for the realignment alternatives B, C, and D are estimated at $5 to $8 million, $55 to $65 million, and $30 to $40 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Realignment of the road away from the eroding bluff would maintain vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian road access to the Cattle Point area through the San Juan Island National Historical Park and would continue to provide a safe and pleasant roadway experience for residents and visitors without the threat of road failure from coastal erosion. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would result in 17 acres of temporary soil disturbance, 13 acres of which would be restored and revegetated. Four acres of new area would be covered by impermeable road surface, but three acres would be recovered from the abandoned road section. Wildlife and bird species would be displaced by ground disturbing activities. The Mt. Finlayson Trail would be directly impacted by the realignment. Long term adverse visual impacts of the new road alignment when viewed from the Cattle Point peninsula, offshore, and from neighboring islands would be moderate. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 100341, 302 pages and maps, August 23, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Parks, Refuges and Forests KW - Agency number: FHWA WA PLD SAJH 10(1) KW - Coastal Zones KW - Erosion KW - National Parks KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Scenic Areas KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources KW - San Juan Island National Historical Park KW - Washington KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/758977847?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2010-08-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CATTLE+POINT+ROAD+REALIGNMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+JUAN+ISLAND+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK+AND+CATTLE+POINT+NATURAL+RESOURCES+CONSERVATION+AREA%2C+SAN+JUAN+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=CATTLE+POINT+ROAD+REALIGNMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+JUAN+ISLAND+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK+AND+CATTLE+POINT+NATURAL+RESOURCES+CONSERVATION+AREA%2C+SAN+JUAN+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 23, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 853675655; 14590-100336_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of a light rail service called the LYNX Blue Line within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Approximately 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in the South Corridor where it extends 9.6 miles with 15 stations. The proposed 10.7-mile LYNX Blue Line Extension would primarily utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and would be located in the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus. The line would then return to North Tryon Street/US 29 to a terminus just south of Interstate 485. This proposed Light Rail Alternative would include 13 stations, seven with park-and-ride facilities and six walk-up stations. Trains will operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and the fare will equal the cost of local bus fare. Trains would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. A vehicle light maintenance facility and storage yard would be constructed on the existing Norfolk Southern intermodal facility that abuts North Brevard Street. Heavy maintenance would take place at the existing South Boulevard light rail facility. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and a design option which includes a change in the station platform and park-and-ride locations for the Sugar Creek Station and the Old Concord Station. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.21 billion and $1.28 billion for the Light Rail Alternative and the Light Rail Alternative-Sugar Creek Design Option, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support the regions land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. As an extension of the LYNX Blue Line, the proposed project would enhance the operating effectiveness of CATS light rail service and leverage the public investment already made in the South Corridor. Under the preferred alternative, it is expected that up to 9,000 new jobs would be added to the local economy from capital expenditures of the project. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 20 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,262 linear feet of streams and 1.5 acres of wetlands. Property acquisition would potentially result in up to 22 business displacements and one residential displacement. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would affect 26 residential properties, two hotels, one medical center, one college dormitory, and one park. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), 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). JF - EPA number: 100336, 558 pages, August 20, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/853675655?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 20, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 853675587; 14590-100336_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of a light rail service called the LYNX Blue Line within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Approximately 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in the South Corridor where it extends 9.6 miles with 15 stations. The proposed 10.7-mile LYNX Blue Line Extension would primarily utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and would be located in the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus. The line would then return to North Tryon Street/US 29 to a terminus just south of Interstate 485. This proposed Light Rail Alternative would include 13 stations, seven with park-and-ride facilities and six walk-up stations. Trains will operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and the fare will equal the cost of local bus fare. Trains would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. A vehicle light maintenance facility and storage yard would be constructed on the existing Norfolk Southern intermodal facility that abuts North Brevard Street. Heavy maintenance would take place at the existing South Boulevard light rail facility. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and a design option which includes a change in the station platform and park-and-ride locations for the Sugar Creek Station and the Old Concord Station. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.21 billion and $1.28 billion for the Light Rail Alternative and the Light Rail Alternative-Sugar Creek Design Option, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support the regions land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. As an extension of the LYNX Blue Line, the proposed project would enhance the operating effectiveness of CATS light rail service and leverage the public investment already made in the South Corridor. Under the preferred alternative, it is expected that up to 9,000 new jobs would be added to the local economy from capital expenditures of the project. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 20 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,262 linear feet of streams and 1.5 acres of wetlands. Property acquisition would potentially result in up to 22 business displacements and one residential displacement. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would affect 26 residential properties, two hotels, one medical center, one college dormitory, and one park. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), 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). JF - EPA number: 100336, 558 pages, August 20, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/853675587?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 20, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 758977843; 14590 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of a light rail service called the LYNX Blue Line within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Approximately 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in the South Corridor where it extends 9.6 miles with 15 stations. The proposed 10.7-mile LYNX Blue Line Extension would primarily utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and would be located in the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus. The line would then return to North Tryon Street/US 29 to a terminus just south of Interstate 485. This proposed Light Rail Alternative would include 13 stations, seven with park-and-ride facilities and six walk-up stations. Trains will operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and the fare will equal the cost of local bus fare. Trains would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. A vehicle light maintenance facility and storage yard would be constructed on the existing Norfolk Southern intermodal facility that abuts North Brevard Street. Heavy maintenance would take place at the existing South Boulevard light rail facility. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and a design option which includes a change in the station platform and park-and-ride locations for the Sugar Creek Station and the Old Concord Station. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.21 billion and $1.28 billion for the Light Rail Alternative and the Light Rail Alternative-Sugar Creek Design Option, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support the regions land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. As an extension of the LYNX Blue Line, the proposed project would enhance the operating effectiveness of CATS light rail service and leverage the public investment already made in the South Corridor. Under the preferred alternative, it is expected that up to 9,000 new jobs would be added to the local economy from capital expenditures of the project. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 20 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,262 linear feet of streams and 1.5 acres of wetlands. Property acquisition would potentially result in up to 22 business displacements and one residential displacement. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would affect 26 residential properties, two hotels, one medical center, one college dormitory, and one park. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), 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). JF - EPA number: 100336, 558 pages, August 20, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/758977843?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2010-08-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Atlanta, Georgia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 20, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 164 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133924; 14588-4_0164 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 164 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133924?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 163 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133922; 14588-4_0163 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 163 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133922?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 152 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133915; 14588-4_0152 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 152 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133915?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 87 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133913; 14588-4_0087 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 87 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133913?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 49 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133608; 14588-4_0049 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 49 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133608?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 41 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133606; 14588-4_0041 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 41 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133606?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 40 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133600; 14588-4_0040 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 40 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133600?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 38 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133593; 14588-4_0038 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 38 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133593?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 30 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133589; 14588-4_0030 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 30 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133589?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 29 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133587; 14588-4_0029 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 29 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133587?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 26 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133580; 14588-4_0026 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133580?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 21 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133577; 14588-4_0021 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 21 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133577?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 20 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133575; 14588-4_0020 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 20 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133575?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 15 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133565; 14588-4_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 15 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133565?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 10 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133560; 14588-4_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 10 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133560?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 162 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133241; 14588-4_0162 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 162 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133241?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 161 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133232; 14588-4_0161 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 161 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133232?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 143 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133227; 14588-4_0143 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 143 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133227?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 158 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133222; 14588-4_0158 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 158 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133222?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 78 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133218; 14588-4_0078 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 78 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133218?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 157 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133209; 14588-4_0157 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 157 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133209?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 77 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133205; 14588-4_0077 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 77 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133205?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 137 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133202; 14588-4_0137 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 137 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133202?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 154 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133197; 14588-4_0154 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 154 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133197?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 136 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133193; 14588-4_0136 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 136 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133193?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CATTLE+POINT+ROAD+REALIGNMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+JUAN+ISLAND+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK+AND+CATTLE+POINT+NATURAL+RESOURCES+CONSERVATION+AREA%2C+SAN+JUAN+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.title=CATTLE+POINT+ROAD+REALIGNMENT+PROJECT%2C+SAN+JUAN+ISLAND+NATIONAL+HISTORICAL+PARK+AND+CATTLE+POINT+NATURAL+RESOURCES+CONSERVATION+AREA%2C+SAN+JUAN+COUNTY%2C+WASHINGTON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 153 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133185; 14588-4_0153 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 153 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133185?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 134 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133168; 14588-4_0134 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 134 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133168?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 125 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133151; 14588-4_0125 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 125 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133151?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+80%2FINTERSTATE+680%2FSTATE+ROUTE+12+INTERCHANGE+PROJECT%2C+SOLANO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+80%2FINTERSTATE+680%2FSTATE+ROUTE+12+INTERCHANGE+PROJECT%2C+SOLANO+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 4 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133145; 14588-4_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 4 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133145?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 2 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133137; 14588-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133137?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 3 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133135; 14588-4_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133135?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 118 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133128; 14588-4_0118 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 118 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133128?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 117 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133115; 14588-4_0117 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 117 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133115?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 116 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133098; 14588-4_0116 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 116 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133098?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 115 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133077; 14588-4_0115 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 115 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133077?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 110 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133062; 14588-4_0110 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 110 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133062?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 109 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133049; 14588-4_0109 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 109 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133049?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 105 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133021; 14588-4_0105 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 105 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133021?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 102 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873133006; 14588-4_0102 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 102 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133006?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 101 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132993; 14588-4_0101 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 101 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132993?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 73 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132792; 14588-4_0073 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 73 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132792?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 72 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132770; 14588-4_0072 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 72 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132770?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 71 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132753; 14588-4_0071 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 71 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132753?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 37 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132743; 14588-4_0037 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 37 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132743?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-27&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=REGIONAL+CONNECTOR+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 68 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132740; 14588-4_0068 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 68 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132740?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 36 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132724; 14588-4_0036 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 36 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132724?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 34 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132710; 14588-4_0034 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 34 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132710?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 64 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132708; 14588-4_0064 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 64 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132708?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 61 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132700; 14588-4_0061 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 61 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132700?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 33 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132698; 14588-4_0033 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 33 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132698?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 31 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132688; 14588-4_0031 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 31 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132688?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 60 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132685; 14588-4_0060 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 60 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132685?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 25 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132675; 14588-4_0025 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132675?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 50 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132668; 14588-4_0050 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 50 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132668?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 22 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132664; 14588-4_0022 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 22 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132664?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 14 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132650; 14588-4_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 14 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132650?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 13 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132635; 14588-4_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 13 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132635?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 12 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132623; 14588-4_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 12 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132623?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 139 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132576; 14588-4_0139 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 139 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132576?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 138 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132540; 14588-4_0138 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 138 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132540?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 131 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132511; 14588-4_0131 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 131 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132511?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 130 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132480; 14588-4_0130 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 130 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132480?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 120 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132443; 14588-4_0120 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 120 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132443?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 119 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132413; 14588-4_0119 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 119 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132413?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 108 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132368; 14588-4_0108 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 108 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132368?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 151 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132305; 14588-4_0151 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 151 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132305?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 74 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132298; 14588-4_0074 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 74 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132298?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 150 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132293; 14588-4_0150 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 150 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132293?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 66 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132272; 14588-4_0066 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 66 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132272?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 65 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132243; 14588-4_0065 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 65 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132243?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 145 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132236; 14588-4_0145 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 145 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132236?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 144 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132222; 14588-4_0144 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 144 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132222?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 140 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132214; 14588-4_0140 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 140 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132214?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 129 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132203; 14588-4_0129 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 129 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132203?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 128 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132194; 14588-4_0128 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 128 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132194?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 123 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132185; 14588-4_0123 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 123 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132185?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 121 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132165; 14588-4_0121 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 121 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132165?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 114 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132157; 14588-4_0114 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 114 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132157?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 113 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132149; 14588-4_0113 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 113 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132149?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 104 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132140; 14588-4_0104 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 104 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132140?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 70 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132072; 14588-4_0070 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 70 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132072?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 63 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132057; 14588-4_0063 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 63 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132057?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 62 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873132047; 14588-4_0062 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 62 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132047?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 43 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131931; 14588-4_0043 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 43 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131931?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 32 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131920; 14588-4_0032 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 32 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131920?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 24 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131894; 14588-4_0024 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131894?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 23 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131880; 14588-4_0023 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131880?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 17 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131865; 14588-4_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 17 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131865?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 16 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131850; 14588-4_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 16 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131850?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 147 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131827; 14588-4_0147 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 147 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131827?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 112 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131808; 14588-4_0112 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 112 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131808?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 111 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131794; 14588-4_0111 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 111 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131794?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 100 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131768; 14588-4_0100 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 100 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131768?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 99 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131753; 14588-4_0099 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 99 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131753?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 69 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131670; 14588-4_0069 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 69 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131670?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 59 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131658; 14588-4_0059 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 59 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131658?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 58 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131642; 14588-4_0058 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 58 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131642?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 1 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131641; 14588-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131641?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 11 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131503; 14588-4_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 11 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131503?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 149 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131475; 14588-4_0149 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 149 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131475?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 148 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131441; 14588-4_0148 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 148 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131441?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 126 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131401; 14588-4_0126 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 126 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131401?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 133 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131207; 14588-4_0133 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 133 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131207?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 80 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131121; 14588-4_0080 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 80 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131121?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 79 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873131101; 14588-4_0079 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 79 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873131101?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 44 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130942; 14588-4_0044 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 44 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130942?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 18 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130918; 14588-4_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 18 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130918?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 98 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130357; 14588-4_0098 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 98 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130357?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 93 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130354; 14588-4_0093 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 93 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130354?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 97 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130316; 14588-4_0097 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 97 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130316?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 91 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130305; 14588-4_0091 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 91 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130305?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 83 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130282; 14588-4_0083 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 83 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130282?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 90 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130245; 14588-4_0090 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 90 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130245?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 57 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130207; 14588-4_0057 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 57 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130207?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 89 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130198; 14588-4_0089 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 89 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130198?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 56 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130172; 14588-4_0056 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 56 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130172?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 88 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130161; 14588-4_0088 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 88 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130161?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 159 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130119; 14588-4_0159 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 159 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130119?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 85 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130117; 14588-4_0085 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 85 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130117?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 54 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130054; 14588-4_0054 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 54 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130054?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 52 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873130005; 14588-4_0052 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 52 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130005?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 42 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129990; 14588-4_0042 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 42 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129990?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 96 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129980; 14588-4_0096 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 96 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129980?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 81 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129948; 14588-4_0081 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 81 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129948?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 95 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129939; 14588-4_0095 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 95 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129939?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 51 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129928; 14588-4_0051 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 51 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129928?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 55 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129835; 14588-4_0055 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 55 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129835?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 35 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129823; 14588-4_0035 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 35 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129823?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 48 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129781; 14588-4_0048 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 48 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129781?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 8 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129743; 14588-4_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 8 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129743?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 46 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129734; 14588-4_0046 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 46 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129734?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 45 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129677; 14588-4_0045 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 45 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129677?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 94 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129558; 14588-4_0094 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 94 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129558?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 92 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129519; 14588-4_0092 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 92 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129519?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 53 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873129221; 14588-4_0053 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 53 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873129221?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 76 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128211; 14588-4_0076 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 76 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128211?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 75 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128191; 14588-4_0075 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 75 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128191?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 6 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128121; 14588-4_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 6 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128121?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 5 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873128109; 14588-4_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 5 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873128109?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. [Part 7 of 164] T2 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 873127864; 14588-4_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 7 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873127864?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. AN - 758977602; 14588 AB - PURPOSE: Capacity enhancements at Philadelphia International Airport (PIA), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are proposed to accommodate current and future aviation demand in the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area under all weather conditions. Delays at PIA are caused by the airfield's configuration and the fleet mix served by the airport. Analyses of the forecast passenger and aircraft activity levels indicate that the numbers and durations of delayed operations at PIA will continue to increase from their current average levels of nearly 10 minutes per operation to nearly 20 minutes per operation in 2025. The Federal Aviation Administration considers an airport with an average delay in excess of five minutes to be congested. Because PIA is a pacing airport, the congestion contributes to delays throughout the national airport system. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternatives, are considered in detail in this final EIS. Action Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) and one cross-wind runway (17-35) by adding a new runway and extending runways 8-26 and 9L-27R to the east. Alternative B would provide for four parallel runways (8-26, 9L-27R, 9C-27C, and 9R-27L) by adding by adding a new runway, extending Runway 8-26 to the west, and extending Runway 9R/-27L to the east. Both build alternatives also would include reconfiguration of the associated taxiways, relocation of navigational aids and the air traffic control tower, and reconfiguration of the terminal complex. Under both action alternatives, terminal space would be expanded, from 2.5 million square feet to 3.6 million square feet in seven terminals under Alternative 8, and from 2.5 million square feet in seven terminals to 3.8 million square feet in four terminals. Costs of alternatives A and B are estimated at $5.35 billion and $5.59 billion, respectively. Construction is projected to begin in 2013 and be completed in 2025. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Either action alternative would enhance airport capacity during all weather conditions, thereby reducing total delays, the costs associated with delays and PIA's contribution to delays in the national airspace system. The improved facility would complement the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Airspace Redesign project and significantly improve airspace interactions and linkages within the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would result in the loss of 82 acres of wetlands, 23 acres of waterways, and 24.5 acres of the Delaware River. Construction would take place in a 100-year floodplain. Significant noise impacts would affect 832 people in 330 housing units in 2025 and 1,196 people in 497 housing units in 2030. Both build alternatives would require the closure of Hog Island Road and relocation of a section of freight track, one of the Sunoco fuel loading piers, and a United Parcel Service facility. Alterative A would also require relocation of one of the dredge dewatering cells at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Mifflin Dredge Disposal Facility. LEGAL MANDATES: Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7506(c) (1)), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 08-0374D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100334, Final EIS--CD-ROM, August 19, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Air Transportation KW - Airports KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Disposal KW - Dredging KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Terminal Facilities KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Weather KW - Pennsylvania KW - Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982, as amended, Project Authorization KW - Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Emission Standards KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/758977602?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2010-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.title=PHILADELPHIA+INTERNATIONAL+AIRPORT+CAPACITY+ENHANCEMENT+PROGRAM%2C+PHILADELPHIA%2C+PENNSYLVANIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - POWDER RIVER TRAINING COMPLEX, ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH DAKOTA. [Part 3 of 3] T2 - POWDER RIVER TRAINING COMPLEX, ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH DAKOTA. AN - 873132917; 14576-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of airspace for military training, primarily B-1 aircrews at Ellsworth Air Force Base (AFB), South Dakota, and B-52 aircrews at Minot AFB, North Dakota is proposed. The existing Powder River airspace no longer supports realistic training missions with the bombers' new target acquisition capabilities, communication and networking capabilities, laser targeting capabilities, optical target tracking capabilities, and smart weapons. Combat readiness requires complex multiple mission training, but the existing Powder River airspace accommodates only 46 percent of required B-1 aircrew training sorties and 31 percent of required B-52 aircrew training sorties. The B-1 and B-52 aircrews also require supersonic training, the proposed Powder River Training Complex (PRTC) would provide for high and low training altitudes, employment of chaff and defensive flares, and simulation of realistic air-to-air and air-to-ground engagements. Realistic multiple aircrew training would occur once quarterly during one to three day large force exercises (LFEs) when approximately 20 aircraft of various types would train together as they fight. Supersonic training of B-1s above 20,000 feet mean sea level and transient fighters above 10,000 feet above ground level would only be authorized the 10 days of LFEs. Gap Military Operations Areas (MOAs) and Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace (ATCAAs) would be activated for 4-hour periods daily during LFEs. Key issues identified during scoping include concerns regarding low-level overflights, sonic booms, impacts to commercial flights, emergency flights, communication, socioeconomic impacts, and impacts to tribal ceremonies or sensitive locations. This draft EIS evaluates a No Action Alternative and three action alternatives that feature various combinations of MOAs. ATCAAs would be part of all action alternatives. Under the No Action Alternative, aircrews would continue limited training in existing airspace and commute to other airspaces for required training. Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide the highest level of training in a realistic environment. Alternatives B and C eliminate some of the low airspace proposed under Alternative A in order to reduce impacts to existing or proposed mining operations, ranching, recreation, and tribal activities. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide military training airspace that is adequately sized, properly configured, and capable of supporting the training mission for B-1 aircrews operating from Ellsworth AFB and B-52 aircrews operating from Minot AFB. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the airspace proposed for Alternative A, the affected population would be 84,420 persons including affected populations on four Native American reservations with significant numbers of people living below the poverty line. Alternatives A, B, or C could respectively impact 129, 97, or 79 civil operations per weekday. Even infrequent low-level overflights could disproportionately impact the Northern Cheyenne and Crow Reservations under the proposed PR-1A and PR-1B MOAs. JF - EPA number: 100322, 478 pages and maps, August 11, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Grazing KW - Indian Reservations KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Mining KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Safety KW - Sonic Booms KW - Weapon Systems KW - Ellsworth Air Force Base KW - Minot Air Force Base KW - South Dakota UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132917?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=POWDER+RIVER+TRAINING+COMPLEX%2C+ELLSWORTH+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=POWDER+RIVER+TRAINING+COMPLEX%2C+ELLSWORTH+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+DAKOTA.&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 - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 11, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - POWDER RIVER TRAINING COMPLEX, ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH DAKOTA. [Part 2 of 3] T2 - POWDER RIVER TRAINING COMPLEX, ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH DAKOTA. AN - 873130896; 14576-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of airspace for military training, primarily B-1 aircrews at Ellsworth Air Force Base (AFB), South Dakota, and B-52 aircrews at Minot AFB, North Dakota is proposed. The existing Powder River airspace no longer supports realistic training missions with the bombers' new target acquisition capabilities, communication and networking capabilities, laser targeting capabilities, optical target tracking capabilities, and smart weapons. Combat readiness requires complex multiple mission training, but the existing Powder River airspace accommodates only 46 percent of required B-1 aircrew training sorties and 31 percent of required B-52 aircrew training sorties. The B-1 and B-52 aircrews also require supersonic training, the proposed Powder River Training Complex (PRTC) would provide for high and low training altitudes, employment of chaff and defensive flares, and simulation of realistic air-to-air and air-to-ground engagements. Realistic multiple aircrew training would occur once quarterly during one to three day large force exercises (LFEs) when approximately 20 aircraft of various types would train together as they fight. Supersonic training of B-1s above 20,000 feet mean sea level and transient fighters above 10,000 feet above ground level would only be authorized the 10 days of LFEs. Gap Military Operations Areas (MOAs) and Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace (ATCAAs) would be activated for 4-hour periods daily during LFEs. Key issues identified during scoping include concerns regarding low-level overflights, sonic booms, impacts to commercial flights, emergency flights, communication, socioeconomic impacts, and impacts to tribal ceremonies or sensitive locations. This draft EIS evaluates a No Action Alternative and three action alternatives that feature various combinations of MOAs. ATCAAs would be part of all action alternatives. Under the No Action Alternative, aircrews would continue limited training in existing airspace and commute to other airspaces for required training. Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide the highest level of training in a realistic environment. Alternatives B and C eliminate some of the low airspace proposed under Alternative A in order to reduce impacts to existing or proposed mining operations, ranching, recreation, and tribal activities. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide military training airspace that is adequately sized, properly configured, and capable of supporting the training mission for B-1 aircrews operating from Ellsworth AFB and B-52 aircrews operating from Minot AFB. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the airspace proposed for Alternative A, the affected population would be 84,420 persons including affected populations on four Native American reservations with significant numbers of people living below the poverty line. Alternatives A, B, or C could respectively impact 129, 97, or 79 civil operations per weekday. Even infrequent low-level overflights could disproportionately impact the Northern Cheyenne and Crow Reservations under the proposed PR-1A and PR-1B MOAs. JF - EPA number: 100322, 478 pages and maps, August 11, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Grazing KW - Indian Reservations KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Mining KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Safety KW - Sonic Booms KW - Weapon Systems KW - Ellsworth Air Force Base KW - Minot Air Force Base KW - South Dakota UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873130896?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=POWDER+RIVER+TRAINING+COMPLEX%2C+ELLSWORTH+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=POWDER+RIVER+TRAINING+COMPLEX%2C+ELLSWORTH+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+DAKOTA.&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 - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 11, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - POWDER RIVER TRAINING COMPLEX, ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH DAKOTA. AN - 755143311; 14576 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of airspace for military training, primarily B-1 aircrews at Ellsworth Air Force Base (AFB), South Dakota, and B-52 aircrews at Minot AFB, North Dakota is proposed. The existing Powder River airspace no longer supports realistic training missions with the bombers' new target acquisition capabilities, communication and networking capabilities, laser targeting capabilities, optical target tracking capabilities, and smart weapons. Combat readiness requires complex multiple mission training, but the existing Powder River airspace accommodates only 46 percent of required B-1 aircrew training sorties and 31 percent of required B-52 aircrew training sorties. The B-1 and B-52 aircrews also require supersonic training, the proposed Powder River Training Complex (PRTC) would provide for high and low training altitudes, employment of chaff and defensive flares, and simulation of realistic air-to-air and air-to-ground engagements. Realistic multiple aircrew training would occur once quarterly during one to three day large force exercises (LFEs) when approximately 20 aircraft of various types would train together as they fight. Supersonic training of B-1s above 20,000 feet mean sea level and transient fighters above 10,000 feet above ground level would only be authorized the 10 days of LFEs. Gap Military Operations Areas (MOAs) and Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace (ATCAAs) would be activated for 4-hour periods daily during LFEs. Key issues identified during scoping include concerns regarding low-level overflights, sonic booms, impacts to commercial flights, emergency flights, communication, socioeconomic impacts, and impacts to tribal ceremonies or sensitive locations. This draft EIS evaluates a No Action Alternative and three action alternatives that feature various combinations of MOAs. ATCAAs would be part of all action alternatives. Under the No Action Alternative, aircrews would continue limited training in existing airspace and commute to other airspaces for required training. Alternative A, which is the preferred alternative, would provide the highest level of training in a realistic environment. Alternatives B and C eliminate some of the low airspace proposed under Alternative A in order to reduce impacts to existing or proposed mining operations, ranching, recreation, and tribal activities. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide military training airspace that is adequately sized, properly configured, and capable of supporting the training mission for B-1 aircrews operating from Ellsworth AFB and B-52 aircrews operating from Minot AFB. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the airspace proposed for Alternative A, the affected population would be 84,420 persons including affected populations on four Native American reservations with significant numbers of people living below the poverty line. Alternatives A, B, or C could respectively impact 129, 97, or 79 civil operations per weekday. Even infrequent low-level overflights could disproportionately impact the Northern Cheyenne and Crow Reservations under the proposed PR-1A and PR-1B MOAs. JF - EPA number: 100322, 478 pages and maps, August 11, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Defense Programs KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Aircraft KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Grazing KW - Indian Reservations KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Military Operations (Air Force) KW - Mining KW - Munitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Recreation KW - Safety KW - Sonic Booms KW - Weapon Systems KW - Ellsworth Air Force Base KW - Minot Air Force Base KW - South Dakota UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/755143311?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2010-08-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=POWDER+RIVER+TRAINING+COMPLEX%2C+ELLSWORTH+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+DAKOTA.&rft.title=POWDER+RIVER+TRAINING+COMPLEX%2C+ELLSWORTH+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+SOUTH+DAKOTA.&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 - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 11, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - RIVER VALLEY INTERMODAL FACILITIES, POPE COUNTY, ARKANSAS (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF FEBRUARY 2006). [Part 3 of 3] T2 - RIVER VALLEY INTERMODAL FACILITIES, POPE COUNTY, ARKANSAS (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF FEBRUARY 2006). AN - 873133492; 14572-8_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal facility for the City of Russellvile and the Arkansas River Valley (ARV) region on an 800-acre site in and on the banks of the Arkansas River in Pope County, Arkansas is proposed. The River Valley Regional Intermodal Facilities Authority, the sponsoring agency, wishes to promote economic development and job creation in the ARV by serving existing industry and providing services necessary to attract new business and industry to the area. The mechanism by which the Authority proposes to promote economic development is to construct and operate a multi-modal transportation complex in the ARV, which includes Conway, Johnson, Logan, Perry, Pope, and Yell counties. The intermodal facilities would be located in the river valley with access to the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System via a slackwater harbor on the Arkansas River with dockside loading and unloading capabilities. The facility would provide a connection to the Tulsa Port of Catoosa in eastern Oklahoma via the Arkansas and Verdigris rivers and would provide a connection to the Mississippi River, thus allowing ready access to the U.S. inland waterway system. Access to the national railroad grid would be provided through the Class I Union Pacific Railroad and/or though The Class III short line Dardanelle Russellville Railroad. The intermodal facilities would also include local roadway access to Interstate 40. Ancillary services at the facility would include on-site rail/truck transfers, truck/water transfers, rail/water transfers, freight tracking, a foreign trade subzone, warehousing, distribution, consolidation, just-in-time inventory, and material storage capabilities. This supplemental draft EIS responds to comments on the 2006 draft EIS and presents new and updated information. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Red Alternative would consist of an 832-acre tract located near Arkansas River Mile (ARM) 203. Most of this site would be within the floodplain of the Arkansas River and a levee system would be required to protect the proposed facilities. Under the Green Alternative, an 882-acre tract located near ARM 203 would be utilized and levee protection would be required. Some high quality wetlands, which would be impacted under the Red Alternative, would be avoided. Additionally, the levee would be set back to protect the forested riparian corridor and to provide a buffer between the site and the river. The Purple Alternative would consist of a 742-acre tract of rolling terrain located near ARM 220 along the north shore which would involve minimal impacts to wetlands and floodplains. The cost estimate range for the proposed intermodal complex alternatives is between $10 million and $30 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed complex would provide intermodal transportation access in a region characterized by a strong manufacturing orientation, with a higher percentage of the workforce in manufacturing jobs than the national average, strong regional educational facilities, and a history of public support for economic development. Persons educated at Arkansas Tech University, the University of Arkansas (Morrilton), and the Vo-Tech School at Russellville High School would provide a steady flow of highly trained workers for the intermodal facility and related ancillary services. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the intermodal facility site and ancillary rail, road, and maritime connections would displace wetlands, and upland habitat, as well as farmland and forested land. Facility operations would create long-term potential for minor releases of chemicals and fuels. Depending on the action alternative selected, the project would displace six to 15 residences and one business. The Purple Alternative could adversely impact some recreational opportunities on Lake Dardanelle. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0272D, Volume 30, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100318, 732 pages and maps, August 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: Federal Aid Project No. HPP-0268(2) KW - Barges KW - Community Facilities KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Harbors KW - Harbor Structures KW - Highways KW - Industrial Districts KW - Industrial Parks KW - International Programs KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Storage KW - Transportation KW - Waterways KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas KW - Arkansas River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133492?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=RIVER+VALLEY+INTERMODAL+FACILITIES%2C+POPE+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+FEBRUARY+2006%29.&rft.title=RIVER+VALLEY+INTERMODAL+FACILITIES%2C+POPE+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+FEBRUARY+2006%29.&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 - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - RIVER VALLEY INTERMODAL FACILITIES, POPE COUNTY, ARKANSAS (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF FEBRUARY 2006). [Part 2 of 3] T2 - RIVER VALLEY INTERMODAL FACILITIES, POPE COUNTY, ARKANSAS (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF FEBRUARY 2006). AN - 873133481; 14572-8_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal facility for the City of Russellvile and the Arkansas River Valley (ARV) region on an 800-acre site in and on the banks of the Arkansas River in Pope County, Arkansas is proposed. The River Valley Regional Intermodal Facilities Authority, the sponsoring agency, wishes to promote economic development and job creation in the ARV by serving existing industry and providing services necessary to attract new business and industry to the area. The mechanism by which the Authority proposes to promote economic development is to construct and operate a multi-modal transportation complex in the ARV, which includes Conway, Johnson, Logan, Perry, Pope, and Yell counties. The intermodal facilities would be located in the river valley with access to the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System via a slackwater harbor on the Arkansas River with dockside loading and unloading capabilities. The facility would provide a connection to the Tulsa Port of Catoosa in eastern Oklahoma via the Arkansas and Verdigris rivers and would provide a connection to the Mississippi River, thus allowing ready access to the U.S. inland waterway system. Access to the national railroad grid would be provided through the Class I Union Pacific Railroad and/or though The Class III short line Dardanelle Russellville Railroad. The intermodal facilities would also include local roadway access to Interstate 40. Ancillary services at the facility would include on-site rail/truck transfers, truck/water transfers, rail/water transfers, freight tracking, a foreign trade subzone, warehousing, distribution, consolidation, just-in-time inventory, and material storage capabilities. This supplemental draft EIS responds to comments on the 2006 draft EIS and presents new and updated information. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Red Alternative would consist of an 832-acre tract located near Arkansas River Mile (ARM) 203. Most of this site would be within the floodplain of the Arkansas River and a levee system would be required to protect the proposed facilities. Under the Green Alternative, an 882-acre tract located near ARM 203 would be utilized and levee protection would be required. Some high quality wetlands, which would be impacted under the Red Alternative, would be avoided. Additionally, the levee would be set back to protect the forested riparian corridor and to provide a buffer between the site and the river. The Purple Alternative would consist of a 742-acre tract of rolling terrain located near ARM 220 along the north shore which would involve minimal impacts to wetlands and floodplains. The cost estimate range for the proposed intermodal complex alternatives is between $10 million and $30 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed complex would provide intermodal transportation access in a region characterized by a strong manufacturing orientation, with a higher percentage of the workforce in manufacturing jobs than the national average, strong regional educational facilities, and a history of public support for economic development. Persons educated at Arkansas Tech University, the University of Arkansas (Morrilton), and the Vo-Tech School at Russellville High School would provide a steady flow of highly trained workers for the intermodal facility and related ancillary services. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the intermodal facility site and ancillary rail, road, and maritime connections would displace wetlands, and upland habitat, as well as farmland and forested land. Facility operations would create long-term potential for minor releases of chemicals and fuels. Depending on the action alternative selected, the project would displace six to 15 residences and one business. The Purple Alternative could adversely impact some recreational opportunities on Lake Dardanelle. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0272D, Volume 30, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100318, 732 pages and maps, August 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: Federal Aid Project No. HPP-0268(2) KW - Barges KW - Community Facilities KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Harbors KW - Harbor Structures KW - Highways KW - Industrial Districts KW - Industrial Parks KW - International Programs KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Storage KW - Transportation KW - Waterways KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas KW - Arkansas River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133481?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=RIVER+VALLEY+INTERMODAL+FACILITIES%2C+POPE+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+FEBRUARY+2006%29.&rft.title=RIVER+VALLEY+INTERMODAL+FACILITIES%2C+POPE+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+FEBRUARY+2006%29.&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 - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HIGHWAY 14, OWATONNA TO DODGE CENTER, STEELE AND DODGE COUNTIES, MINNESOTA. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - HIGHWAY 14, OWATONNA TO DODGE CENTER, STEELE AND DODGE COUNTIES, MINNESOTA. AN - 873133465; 14574-0_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of 19 miles of Trunk Highway (TH) 14 from the existing four-lane bypass of Dodge Center to the intersection of TH 14 and Interstate 35 (I-35) in Steele and Dodge counties, Minnesota is proposed. TH 14 is a major east-west highway providing important links between the interregional corridors of I-35 in Owatonna, Highway 52 in Rochester, and Highway 169 in Mankato. The corridor is characterized by growing traffic levels, particularly truck traffic levels, reduced average travel speeds, limited passing opportunities, and significant safety issues. The existing two-lane highway does not meet design standards for the type and volume of traffic it carries. The proposed improvements would include the construction of a four-lane divided, fully access-controlled freeway through the entire study corridor. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered in this final EIS. Alternative 2 would reconstruct TH 14 on the existing alignment, implementing the design described above. Alternative 3 would result in the construction of the four-lane upgrade partially on the existing alignment and partly on new alignment. Both alternatives include an option to provide a southern bypass around Claremont. Alternative 3, the South Bypass Alignment with Claremont Bypass Option 4 is the preferred alternative. Preferred interchange design options are a modified folded diamond interchange at County Road 45 in the City of Owatonna and a standard diamond at the existing Highway 14/County Road 43 intersection in Havana Township. Cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $151.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The upgraded facility would maintain mobility under future traffic conditions, improve travel safety, enhance system continuity by completing a four-lane segment connecting two contiguous four lane sections, and foster economic growth along the corridor. Improved movement of traffic along the corridor could increase use of transit options in the region and improve the efficiency of transit connections. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 578 acres of right-of-way and would displace 17 residences, 600 acres of prime or unique farmland, and 15.9 acres of wetlands. The project would impact three properties which are eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The highway would add 123 acres of new impervious surface to the corridor, increasing roadway runoff and adding greater levels of pollutants to receiving surface flows. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed Minnesota standards at many residential properties. Construction workers would encounter 22 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 08-0469D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100320, Condensed Final EIS--178 pages and maps on CD-ROM, Draft EIS--267 pages and maps on CD-ROM, August 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MN-EIS-08-03-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Minnesota KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites 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/873133465?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HIGHWAY+14%2C+OWATONNA+TO+DODGE+CENTER%2C+STEELE+AND+DODGE+COUNTIES%2C+MINNESOTA.&rft.title=HIGHWAY+14%2C+OWATONNA+TO+DODGE+CENTER%2C+STEELE+AND+DODGE+COUNTIES%2C+MINNESOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, St. Paul, Minnesota; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - RIVER VALLEY INTERMODAL FACILITIES, POPE COUNTY, ARKANSAS (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF FEBRUARY 2006). [Part 1 of 3] T2 - RIVER VALLEY INTERMODAL FACILITIES, POPE COUNTY, ARKANSAS (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF FEBRUARY 2006). AN - 873132527; 14572-8_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal facility for the City of Russellvile and the Arkansas River Valley (ARV) region on an 800-acre site in and on the banks of the Arkansas River in Pope County, Arkansas is proposed. The River Valley Regional Intermodal Facilities Authority, the sponsoring agency, wishes to promote economic development and job creation in the ARV by serving existing industry and providing services necessary to attract new business and industry to the area. The mechanism by which the Authority proposes to promote economic development is to construct and operate a multi-modal transportation complex in the ARV, which includes Conway, Johnson, Logan, Perry, Pope, and Yell counties. The intermodal facilities would be located in the river valley with access to the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System via a slackwater harbor on the Arkansas River with dockside loading and unloading capabilities. The facility would provide a connection to the Tulsa Port of Catoosa in eastern Oklahoma via the Arkansas and Verdigris rivers and would provide a connection to the Mississippi River, thus allowing ready access to the U.S. inland waterway system. Access to the national railroad grid would be provided through the Class I Union Pacific Railroad and/or though The Class III short line Dardanelle Russellville Railroad. The intermodal facilities would also include local roadway access to Interstate 40. Ancillary services at the facility would include on-site rail/truck transfers, truck/water transfers, rail/water transfers, freight tracking, a foreign trade subzone, warehousing, distribution, consolidation, just-in-time inventory, and material storage capabilities. This supplemental draft EIS responds to comments on the 2006 draft EIS and presents new and updated information. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Red Alternative would consist of an 832-acre tract located near Arkansas River Mile (ARM) 203. Most of this site would be within the floodplain of the Arkansas River and a levee system would be required to protect the proposed facilities. Under the Green Alternative, an 882-acre tract located near ARM 203 would be utilized and levee protection would be required. Some high quality wetlands, which would be impacted under the Red Alternative, would be avoided. Additionally, the levee would be set back to protect the forested riparian corridor and to provide a buffer between the site and the river. The Purple Alternative would consist of a 742-acre tract of rolling terrain located near ARM 220 along the north shore which would involve minimal impacts to wetlands and floodplains. The cost estimate range for the proposed intermodal complex alternatives is between $10 million and $30 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed complex would provide intermodal transportation access in a region characterized by a strong manufacturing orientation, with a higher percentage of the workforce in manufacturing jobs than the national average, strong regional educational facilities, and a history of public support for economic development. Persons educated at Arkansas Tech University, the University of Arkansas (Morrilton), and the Vo-Tech School at Russellville High School would provide a steady flow of highly trained workers for the intermodal facility and related ancillary services. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the intermodal facility site and ancillary rail, road, and maritime connections would displace wetlands, and upland habitat, as well as farmland and forested land. Facility operations would create long-term potential for minor releases of chemicals and fuels. Depending on the action alternative selected, the project would displace six to 15 residences and one business. The Purple Alternative could adversely impact some recreational opportunities on Lake Dardanelle. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0272D, Volume 30, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100318, 732 pages and maps, August 10, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: Federal Aid Project No. HPP-0268(2) KW - Barges KW - Community Facilities KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Harbors KW - Harbor Structures KW - Highways KW - Industrial Districts KW - Industrial Parks KW - International Programs KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Storage KW - Transportation KW - Waterways KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas KW - Arkansas River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873132527?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=RIVER+VALLEY+INTERMODAL+FACILITIES%2C+POPE+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+FEBRUARY+2006%29.&rft.title=RIVER+VALLEY+INTERMODAL+FACILITIES%2C+POPE+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+FEBRUARY+2006%29.&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 - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - RIVER VALLEY INTERMODAL FACILITIES, POPE COUNTY, ARKANSAS (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF FEBRUARY 2006). AN - 755142960; 14572 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of an intermodal facility for the City of Russellvile and the Arkansas River Valley (ARV) region on an 800-acre site in and on the banks of the Arkansas River in Pope County, Arkansas is proposed. The River Valley Regional Intermodal Facilities Authority, the sponsoring agency, wishes to promote economic development and job creation in the ARV by serving existing industry and providing services necessary to attract new business and industry to the area. The mechanism by which the Authority proposes to promote economic development is to construct and operate a multi-modal transportation complex in the ARV, which includes Conway, Johnson, Logan, Perry, Pope, and Yell counties. The intermodal facilities would be located in the river valley with access to the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System via a slackwater harbor on the Arkansas River with dockside loading and unloading capabilities. The facility would provide a connection to the Tulsa Port of Catoosa in eastern Oklahoma via the Arkansas and Verdigris rivers and would provide a connection to the Mississippi River, thus allowing ready access to the U.S. inland waterway system. Access to the national railroad grid would be provided through the Class I Union Pacific Railroad and/or though The Class III short line Dardanelle Russellville Railroad. The intermodal facilities would also include local roadway access to Interstate 40. Ancillary services at the facility would include on-site rail/truck transfers, truck/water transfers, rail/water transfers, freight tracking, a foreign trade subzone, warehousing, distribution, consolidation, just-in-time inventory, and material storage capabilities. This supplemental draft EIS responds to comments on the 2006 draft EIS and presents new and updated information. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Red Alternative would consist of an 832-acre tract located near Arkansas River Mile (ARM) 203. Most of this site would be within the floodplain of the Arkansas River and a levee system would be required to protect the proposed facilities. Under the Green Alternative, an 882-acre tract located near ARM 203 would be utilized and levee protection would be required. Some high quality wetlands, which would be impacted under the Red Alternative, would be avoided. Additionally, the levee would be set back to protect the forested riparian corridor and to provide a buffer between the site and the river. The Purple Alternative would consist of a 742-acre tract of rolling terrain located near ARM 220 along the north shore which would involve minimal impacts to wetlands and floodplains. The cost estimate range for the proposed intermodal complex alternatives is between $10 million and $30 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed complex would provide intermodal transportation access in a region characterized by a strong manufacturing orientation, with a higher percentage of the workforce in manufacturing jobs than the national average, strong regional educational facilities, and a history of public support for economic development. Persons educated at Arkansas Tech University, the University of Arkansas (Morrilton), and the Vo-Tech School at Russellville High School would provide a steady flow of highly trained workers for the intermodal facility and related ancillary services. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the intermodal facility site and ancillary rail, road, and maritime connections would displace wetlands, and upland habitat, as well as farmland and forested land. Facility operations would create long-term potential for minor releases of chemicals and fuels. Depending on the action alternative selected, the project would displace six to 15 residences and one business. The Purple Alternative could adversely impact some recreational opportunities on Lake Dardanelle. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) and Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 101 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 06-0272D, Volume 30, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 100318, 732 pages and maps, August 10, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: Federal Aid Project No. HPP-0268(2) KW - Barges KW - Community Facilities KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Harbors KW - Harbor Structures KW - Highways KW - Industrial Districts KW - Industrial Parks KW - International Programs KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Roads KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Storage KW - Transportation KW - Waterways KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas KW - Arkansas River KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/755142960?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2010-08-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=RIVER+VALLEY+INTERMODAL+FACILITIES%2C+POPE+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+FEBRUARY+2006%29.&rft.title=RIVER+VALLEY+INTERMODAL+FACILITIES%2C+POPE+COUNTY%2C+ARKANSAS+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+FEBRUARY+2006%29.&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 - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - HIGHWAY 14, OWATONNA TO DODGE CENTER, STEELE AND DODGE COUNTIES, MINNESOTA. AN - 755142696; 14574 AB - PURPOSE: The improvement of 19 miles of Trunk Highway (TH) 14 from the existing four-lane bypass of Dodge Center to the intersection of TH 14 and Interstate 35 (I-35) in Steele and Dodge counties, Minnesota is proposed. TH 14 is a major east-west highway providing important links between the interregional corridors of I-35 in Owatonna, Highway 52 in Rochester, and Highway 169 in Mankato. The corridor is characterized by growing traffic levels, particularly truck traffic levels, reduced average travel speeds, limited passing opportunities, and significant safety issues. The existing two-lane highway does not meet design standards for the type and volume of traffic it carries. The proposed improvements would include the construction of a four-lane divided, fully access-controlled freeway through the entire study corridor. Three alternatives, including a No-Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are considered in this final EIS. Alternative 2 would reconstruct TH 14 on the existing alignment, implementing the design described above. Alternative 3 would result in the construction of the four-lane upgrade partially on the existing alignment and partly on new alignment. Both alternatives include an option to provide a southern bypass around Claremont. Alternative 3, the South Bypass Alignment with Claremont Bypass Option 4 is the preferred alternative. Preferred interchange design options are a modified folded diamond interchange at County Road 45 in the City of Owatonna and a standard diamond at the existing Highway 14/County Road 43 intersection in Havana Township. Cost for the preferred alternative is estimated at $151.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The upgraded facility would maintain mobility under future traffic conditions, improve travel safety, enhance system continuity by completing a four-lane segment connecting two contiguous four lane sections, and foster economic growth along the corridor. Improved movement of traffic along the corridor could increase use of transit options in the region and improve the efficiency of transit connections. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 578 acres of right-of-way and would displace 17 residences, 600 acres of prime or unique farmland, and 15.9 acres of wetlands. The project would impact three properties which are eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The highway would add 123 acres of new impervious surface to the corridor, increasing roadway runoff and adding greater levels of pollutants to receiving surface flows. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed Minnesota standards at many residential properties. Construction workers would encounter 22 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 08-0469D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 100320, Condensed Final EIS--178 pages and maps on CD-ROM, Draft EIS--267 pages and maps on CD-ROM, August 10, 2010 PY - 2010 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MN-EIS-08-03-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Minnesota KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Archaeological Sites 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/755142696?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2010-08-10&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=HIGHWAY+14%2C+OWATONNA+TO+DODGE+CENTER%2C+STEELE+AND+DODGE+COUNTIES%2C+MINNESOTA.&rft.title=HIGHWAY+14%2C+OWATONNA+TO+DODGE+CENTER%2C+STEELE+AND+DODGE+COUNTIES%2C+MINNESOTA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, St. Paul, Minnesota; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 10, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. [Part 28 of 33] T2 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. AN - 873133099; 14567-3_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new cable-stayed bridge that would replace the Goethals Bridge and continue to serve as an Interstate 278 (I-278) link across the Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York and Elizabeth, New Jersey is proposed. The Goethals Bridge is a primary path of travel in the bi-state metropolitan area's regional highway network and provides a direct connection to the New Jersey Turnpike and access to the West Shore Expressway, the major north-south highway on Staten Island. The bridge was completed in 1928 and by the 1980s had become functionally obsolete. Traffic across the Goethals Bridge increased an average of 33 percent annually between 1964 and 1973. Total weekday peak-period traffic volumes for both directions have increased from 7,100 to 36,600 vehicles between 1964 and 2004. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to overall need for the project, demolition of the existing bridge, potential traffic increases on local roadways, impacts to wetlands and wildlife, and displacement of residential and commercial properties. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The No Build Alternative assumes that operation and maintenance of the Goethals Bridge would continue and that the existing structure would require a full deck replacement and retrofit procedures for seismic upgrade within the next 7 to 10 years. Two build alternatives would place a new six-lane structure on new alignments either north or south of the existing structure's alignment. The new bridge would be constructed in its entirety, after which the existing bridge would be demolished. Two additional build alternatives would place one-half of a new six-lane structure within the existing Goethals Bridge alignment with either the southern half or northern half of the new bridge adjacent to the existing alignment. One half of the new bridge would be constructed first and would temporarily accommodate both directions of traffic during demolition of the existing bridge and construction of the second half of the new bridge. The New Alignment South is the preferred alternative. The proposed new bridge would consist of six 12-foot-wide travel lanes, a 12-foot-wide outer shoulder on each roadway, a 5-foot-wide inner shoulder on each roadway, a minimum 10-foot-wide sidewalk/bikeway along the northern edge of the westbound roadway, and a central area to be maintained between the eastbound and westbound decks to accommodate the provision of future transit service if warranted during the service life of the bridge. Navigational vertical clearance under the new bridge would be a minimum of 135 feet above mean high water and horizontal clearance would be increased from the existing 617 feet to a total of 900 feet between the two main piers. The top elevation of the two bridge towers would be 272 feet above mean sea level, and would not conflict with flight departures from Newark Liberty International Airport which is located three miles north of the bridge. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address the deficiencies of the functionally obsolete existing bridge and would reduce the life-cycle cost concerns associated with future rehabilitation and maintenance requirements. Completion of the new span would provide transportation system redundancy, improve traffic conditions, reduce accidents, provide safe and reliable truck access for interstate movement of goods, and provide for potential future transit in the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would displace 51 residential and eight business properties. It would have an adverse effect on three historic properties, including demolition of the Goethals Bridge, as well as visual impacts to the Staten Island Railroad Historic District in Elizabeth and the Staten Island Railway Lift Truss Bridge over the Arthur Kill. Under the preferred alternative, 5.59 acres of wetlands would be impacted, most predominantly within the tidal wetlands of the Old Place Creek system in Staten Island. Two traffic locations in New Jersey and seven in New York would exhibit traffic conditions that are worse than the No Build condition in 2034. Emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulates, and carbon monoxide would exceed standards during the construction period. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0301D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100313, Final EIS--3 Volumes on CD-ROM, August 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Interstate Commerce KW - Navigation KW - Noise Assessments KW - Property Disposition KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Waterways KW - Wetlands KW - Arthur Kill KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Newark International Airport KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133099?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.title=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, New York, New York; DHS N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. [Part 27 of 33] T2 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. AN - 873133088; 14567-3_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new cable-stayed bridge that would replace the Goethals Bridge and continue to serve as an Interstate 278 (I-278) link across the Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York and Elizabeth, New Jersey is proposed. The Goethals Bridge is a primary path of travel in the bi-state metropolitan area's regional highway network and provides a direct connection to the New Jersey Turnpike and access to the West Shore Expressway, the major north-south highway on Staten Island. The bridge was completed in 1928 and by the 1980s had become functionally obsolete. Traffic across the Goethals Bridge increased an average of 33 percent annually between 1964 and 1973. Total weekday peak-period traffic volumes for both directions have increased from 7,100 to 36,600 vehicles between 1964 and 2004. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to overall need for the project, demolition of the existing bridge, potential traffic increases on local roadways, impacts to wetlands and wildlife, and displacement of residential and commercial properties. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The No Build Alternative assumes that operation and maintenance of the Goethals Bridge would continue and that the existing structure would require a full deck replacement and retrofit procedures for seismic upgrade within the next 7 to 10 years. Two build alternatives would place a new six-lane structure on new alignments either north or south of the existing structure's alignment. The new bridge would be constructed in its entirety, after which the existing bridge would be demolished. Two additional build alternatives would place one-half of a new six-lane structure within the existing Goethals Bridge alignment with either the southern half or northern half of the new bridge adjacent to the existing alignment. One half of the new bridge would be constructed first and would temporarily accommodate both directions of traffic during demolition of the existing bridge and construction of the second half of the new bridge. The New Alignment South is the preferred alternative. The proposed new bridge would consist of six 12-foot-wide travel lanes, a 12-foot-wide outer shoulder on each roadway, a 5-foot-wide inner shoulder on each roadway, a minimum 10-foot-wide sidewalk/bikeway along the northern edge of the westbound roadway, and a central area to be maintained between the eastbound and westbound decks to accommodate the provision of future transit service if warranted during the service life of the bridge. Navigational vertical clearance under the new bridge would be a minimum of 135 feet above mean high water and horizontal clearance would be increased from the existing 617 feet to a total of 900 feet between the two main piers. The top elevation of the two bridge towers would be 272 feet above mean sea level, and would not conflict with flight departures from Newark Liberty International Airport which is located three miles north of the bridge. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address the deficiencies of the functionally obsolete existing bridge and would reduce the life-cycle cost concerns associated with future rehabilitation and maintenance requirements. Completion of the new span would provide transportation system redundancy, improve traffic conditions, reduce accidents, provide safe and reliable truck access for interstate movement of goods, and provide for potential future transit in the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would displace 51 residential and eight business properties. It would have an adverse effect on three historic properties, including demolition of the Goethals Bridge, as well as visual impacts to the Staten Island Railroad Historic District in Elizabeth and the Staten Island Railway Lift Truss Bridge over the Arthur Kill. Under the preferred alternative, 5.59 acres of wetlands would be impacted, most predominantly within the tidal wetlands of the Old Place Creek system in Staten Island. Two traffic locations in New Jersey and seven in New York would exhibit traffic conditions that are worse than the No Build condition in 2034. Emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulates, and carbon monoxide would exceed standards during the construction period. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0301D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100313, Final EIS--3 Volumes on CD-ROM, August 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Interstate Commerce KW - Navigation KW - Noise Assessments KW - Property Disposition KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Waterways KW - Wetlands KW - Arthur Kill KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Newark International Airport KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133088?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.title=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, New York, New York; DHS N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. [Part 26 of 33] T2 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. AN - 873133082; 14567-3_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new cable-stayed bridge that would replace the Goethals Bridge and continue to serve as an Interstate 278 (I-278) link across the Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York and Elizabeth, New Jersey is proposed. The Goethals Bridge is a primary path of travel in the bi-state metropolitan area's regional highway network and provides a direct connection to the New Jersey Turnpike and access to the West Shore Expressway, the major north-south highway on Staten Island. The bridge was completed in 1928 and by the 1980s had become functionally obsolete. Traffic across the Goethals Bridge increased an average of 33 percent annually between 1964 and 1973. Total weekday peak-period traffic volumes for both directions have increased from 7,100 to 36,600 vehicles between 1964 and 2004. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to overall need for the project, demolition of the existing bridge, potential traffic increases on local roadways, impacts to wetlands and wildlife, and displacement of residential and commercial properties. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The No Build Alternative assumes that operation and maintenance of the Goethals Bridge would continue and that the existing structure would require a full deck replacement and retrofit procedures for seismic upgrade within the next 7 to 10 years. Two build alternatives would place a new six-lane structure on new alignments either north or south of the existing structure's alignment. The new bridge would be constructed in its entirety, after which the existing bridge would be demolished. Two additional build alternatives would place one-half of a new six-lane structure within the existing Goethals Bridge alignment with either the southern half or northern half of the new bridge adjacent to the existing alignment. One half of the new bridge would be constructed first and would temporarily accommodate both directions of traffic during demolition of the existing bridge and construction of the second half of the new bridge. The New Alignment South is the preferred alternative. The proposed new bridge would consist of six 12-foot-wide travel lanes, a 12-foot-wide outer shoulder on each roadway, a 5-foot-wide inner shoulder on each roadway, a minimum 10-foot-wide sidewalk/bikeway along the northern edge of the westbound roadway, and a central area to be maintained between the eastbound and westbound decks to accommodate the provision of future transit service if warranted during the service life of the bridge. Navigational vertical clearance under the new bridge would be a minimum of 135 feet above mean high water and horizontal clearance would be increased from the existing 617 feet to a total of 900 feet between the two main piers. The top elevation of the two bridge towers would be 272 feet above mean sea level, and would not conflict with flight departures from Newark Liberty International Airport which is located three miles north of the bridge. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address the deficiencies of the functionally obsolete existing bridge and would reduce the life-cycle cost concerns associated with future rehabilitation and maintenance requirements. Completion of the new span would provide transportation system redundancy, improve traffic conditions, reduce accidents, provide safe and reliable truck access for interstate movement of goods, and provide for potential future transit in the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would displace 51 residential and eight business properties. It would have an adverse effect on three historic properties, including demolition of the Goethals Bridge, as well as visual impacts to the Staten Island Railroad Historic District in Elizabeth and the Staten Island Railway Lift Truss Bridge over the Arthur Kill. Under the preferred alternative, 5.59 acres of wetlands would be impacted, most predominantly within the tidal wetlands of the Old Place Creek system in Staten Island. Two traffic locations in New Jersey and seven in New York would exhibit traffic conditions that are worse than the No Build condition in 2034. Emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulates, and carbon monoxide would exceed standards during the construction period. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0301D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100313, Final EIS--3 Volumes on CD-ROM, August 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Interstate Commerce KW - Navigation KW - Noise Assessments KW - Property Disposition KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Waterways KW - Wetlands KW - Arthur Kill KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Newark International Airport KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133082?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.title=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, New York, New York; DHS N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. [Part 25 of 33] T2 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. AN - 873133075; 14567-3_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new cable-stayed bridge that would replace the Goethals Bridge and continue to serve as an Interstate 278 (I-278) link across the Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York and Elizabeth, New Jersey is proposed. The Goethals Bridge is a primary path of travel in the bi-state metropolitan area's regional highway network and provides a direct connection to the New Jersey Turnpike and access to the West Shore Expressway, the major north-south highway on Staten Island. The bridge was completed in 1928 and by the 1980s had become functionally obsolete. Traffic across the Goethals Bridge increased an average of 33 percent annually between 1964 and 1973. Total weekday peak-period traffic volumes for both directions have increased from 7,100 to 36,600 vehicles between 1964 and 2004. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to overall need for the project, demolition of the existing bridge, potential traffic increases on local roadways, impacts to wetlands and wildlife, and displacement of residential and commercial properties. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The No Build Alternative assumes that operation and maintenance of the Goethals Bridge would continue and that the existing structure would require a full deck replacement and retrofit procedures for seismic upgrade within the next 7 to 10 years. Two build alternatives would place a new six-lane structure on new alignments either north or south of the existing structure's alignment. The new bridge would be constructed in its entirety, after which the existing bridge would be demolished. Two additional build alternatives would place one-half of a new six-lane structure within the existing Goethals Bridge alignment with either the southern half or northern half of the new bridge adjacent to the existing alignment. One half of the new bridge would be constructed first and would temporarily accommodate both directions of traffic during demolition of the existing bridge and construction of the second half of the new bridge. The New Alignment South is the preferred alternative. The proposed new bridge would consist of six 12-foot-wide travel lanes, a 12-foot-wide outer shoulder on each roadway, a 5-foot-wide inner shoulder on each roadway, a minimum 10-foot-wide sidewalk/bikeway along the northern edge of the westbound roadway, and a central area to be maintained between the eastbound and westbound decks to accommodate the provision of future transit service if warranted during the service life of the bridge. Navigational vertical clearance under the new bridge would be a minimum of 135 feet above mean high water and horizontal clearance would be increased from the existing 617 feet to a total of 900 feet between the two main piers. The top elevation of the two bridge towers would be 272 feet above mean sea level, and would not conflict with flight departures from Newark Liberty International Airport which is located three miles north of the bridge. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address the deficiencies of the functionally obsolete existing bridge and would reduce the life-cycle cost concerns associated with future rehabilitation and maintenance requirements. Completion of the new span would provide transportation system redundancy, improve traffic conditions, reduce accidents, provide safe and reliable truck access for interstate movement of goods, and provide for potential future transit in the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would displace 51 residential and eight business properties. It would have an adverse effect on three historic properties, including demolition of the Goethals Bridge, as well as visual impacts to the Staten Island Railroad Historic District in Elizabeth and the Staten Island Railway Lift Truss Bridge over the Arthur Kill. Under the preferred alternative, 5.59 acres of wetlands would be impacted, most predominantly within the tidal wetlands of the Old Place Creek system in Staten Island. Two traffic locations in New Jersey and seven in New York would exhibit traffic conditions that are worse than the No Build condition in 2034. Emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulates, and carbon monoxide would exceed standards during the construction period. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0301D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100313, Final EIS--3 Volumes on CD-ROM, August 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Interstate Commerce KW - Navigation KW - Noise Assessments KW - Property Disposition KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Waterways KW - Wetlands KW - Arthur Kill KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Newark International Airport KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133075?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.title=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, New York, New York; DHS N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. [Part 24 of 33] T2 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. AN - 873133068; 14567-3_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new cable-stayed bridge that would replace the Goethals Bridge and continue to serve as an Interstate 278 (I-278) link across the Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York and Elizabeth, New Jersey is proposed. The Goethals Bridge is a primary path of travel in the bi-state metropolitan area's regional highway network and provides a direct connection to the New Jersey Turnpike and access to the West Shore Expressway, the major north-south highway on Staten Island. The bridge was completed in 1928 and by the 1980s had become functionally obsolete. Traffic across the Goethals Bridge increased an average of 33 percent annually between 1964 and 1973. Total weekday peak-period traffic volumes for both directions have increased from 7,100 to 36,600 vehicles between 1964 and 2004. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to overall need for the project, demolition of the existing bridge, potential traffic increases on local roadways, impacts to wetlands and wildlife, and displacement of residential and commercial properties. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The No Build Alternative assumes that operation and maintenance of the Goethals Bridge would continue and that the existing structure would require a full deck replacement and retrofit procedures for seismic upgrade within the next 7 to 10 years. Two build alternatives would place a new six-lane structure on new alignments either north or south of the existing structure's alignment. The new bridge would be constructed in its entirety, after which the existing bridge would be demolished. Two additional build alternatives would place one-half of a new six-lane structure within the existing Goethals Bridge alignment with either the southern half or northern half of the new bridge adjacent to the existing alignment. One half of the new bridge would be constructed first and would temporarily accommodate both directions of traffic during demolition of the existing bridge and construction of the second half of the new bridge. The New Alignment South is the preferred alternative. The proposed new bridge would consist of six 12-foot-wide travel lanes, a 12-foot-wide outer shoulder on each roadway, a 5-foot-wide inner shoulder on each roadway, a minimum 10-foot-wide sidewalk/bikeway along the northern edge of the westbound roadway, and a central area to be maintained between the eastbound and westbound decks to accommodate the provision of future transit service if warranted during the service life of the bridge. Navigational vertical clearance under the new bridge would be a minimum of 135 feet above mean high water and horizontal clearance would be increased from the existing 617 feet to a total of 900 feet between the two main piers. The top elevation of the two bridge towers would be 272 feet above mean sea level, and would not conflict with flight departures from Newark Liberty International Airport which is located three miles north of the bridge. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address the deficiencies of the functionally obsolete existing bridge and would reduce the life-cycle cost concerns associated with future rehabilitation and maintenance requirements. Completion of the new span would provide transportation system redundancy, improve traffic conditions, reduce accidents, provide safe and reliable truck access for interstate movement of goods, and provide for potential future transit in the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would displace 51 residential and eight business properties. It would have an adverse effect on three historic properties, including demolition of the Goethals Bridge, as well as visual impacts to the Staten Island Railroad Historic District in Elizabeth and the Staten Island Railway Lift Truss Bridge over the Arthur Kill. Under the preferred alternative, 5.59 acres of wetlands would be impacted, most predominantly within the tidal wetlands of the Old Place Creek system in Staten Island. Two traffic locations in New Jersey and seven in New York would exhibit traffic conditions that are worse than the No Build condition in 2034. Emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulates, and carbon monoxide would exceed standards during the construction period. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0301D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100313, Final EIS--3 Volumes on CD-ROM, August 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Interstate Commerce KW - Navigation KW - Noise Assessments KW - Property Disposition KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Waterways KW - Wetlands KW - Arthur Kill KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Newark International Airport KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133068?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.title=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, New York, New York; DHS N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. [Part 23 of 33] T2 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. AN - 873133060; 14567-3_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new cable-stayed bridge that would replace the Goethals Bridge and continue to serve as an Interstate 278 (I-278) link across the Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York and Elizabeth, New Jersey is proposed. The Goethals Bridge is a primary path of travel in the bi-state metropolitan area's regional highway network and provides a direct connection to the New Jersey Turnpike and access to the West Shore Expressway, the major north-south highway on Staten Island. The bridge was completed in 1928 and by the 1980s had become functionally obsolete. Traffic across the Goethals Bridge increased an average of 33 percent annually between 1964 and 1973. Total weekday peak-period traffic volumes for both directions have increased from 7,100 to 36,600 vehicles between 1964 and 2004. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to overall need for the project, demolition of the existing bridge, potential traffic increases on local roadways, impacts to wetlands and wildlife, and displacement of residential and commercial properties. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The No Build Alternative assumes that operation and maintenance of the Goethals Bridge would continue and that the existing structure would require a full deck replacement and retrofit procedures for seismic upgrade within the next 7 to 10 years. Two build alternatives would place a new six-lane structure on new alignments either north or south of the existing structure's alignment. The new bridge would be constructed in its entirety, after which the existing bridge would be demolished. Two additional build alternatives would place one-half of a new six-lane structure within the existing Goethals Bridge alignment with either the southern half or northern half of the new bridge adjacent to the existing alignment. One half of the new bridge would be constructed first and would temporarily accommodate both directions of traffic during demolition of the existing bridge and construction of the second half of the new bridge. The New Alignment South is the preferred alternative. The proposed new bridge would consist of six 12-foot-wide travel lanes, a 12-foot-wide outer shoulder on each roadway, a 5-foot-wide inner shoulder on each roadway, a minimum 10-foot-wide sidewalk/bikeway along the northern edge of the westbound roadway, and a central area to be maintained between the eastbound and westbound decks to accommodate the provision of future transit service if warranted during the service life of the bridge. Navigational vertical clearance under the new bridge would be a minimum of 135 feet above mean high water and horizontal clearance would be increased from the existing 617 feet to a total of 900 feet between the two main piers. The top elevation of the two bridge towers would be 272 feet above mean sea level, and would not conflict with flight departures from Newark Liberty International Airport which is located three miles north of the bridge. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address the deficiencies of the functionally obsolete existing bridge and would reduce the life-cycle cost concerns associated with future rehabilitation and maintenance requirements. Completion of the new span would provide transportation system redundancy, improve traffic conditions, reduce accidents, provide safe and reliable truck access for interstate movement of goods, and provide for potential future transit in the corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would displace 51 residential and eight business properties. It would have an adverse effect on three historic properties, including demolition of the Goethals Bridge, as well as visual impacts to the Staten Island Railroad Historic District in Elizabeth and the Staten Island Railway Lift Truss Bridge over the Arthur Kill. Under the preferred alternative, 5.59 acres of wetlands would be impacted, most predominantly within the tidal wetlands of the Old Place Creek system in Staten Island. Two traffic locations in New Jersey and seven in New York would exhibit traffic conditions that are worse than the No Build condition in 2034. Emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulates, and carbon monoxide would exceed standards during the construction period. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), General Bridge Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 535), and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0301D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 100313, Final EIS--3 Volumes on CD-ROM, August 6, 2010 PY - 2010 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Airports KW - Bridges KW - Channels KW - Demolition KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Interstate Commerce KW - Navigation KW - Noise Assessments KW - Property Disposition KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Waterways KW - Wetlands KW - Arthur Kill KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Newark International Airport KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - General Bridge Act of 1946, Coast Guard Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Historic Sites KW - Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/873133060?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2010-08-06&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.title=GOETHALS+BRIDGE+REPLACEMENT+PROJECT%2C+STATEN+ISLAND%2C+NEW+YORK+AND+ELIZABETH%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, New York, New York; DHS N1 - Date revised - 2010-09-23 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 6, 2010 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. [Part 17 of 33] T2 - GOETHALS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK AND ELIZABETH, NEW JERSEY. AN - 873133058; 14567-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a new cable-stayed bridge that would replace the Goethals Bridge and continue to serve as an Interstate 278 (I-278) link across the Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York and Elizabeth, New Jersey is proposed. The Goethals Bridge is a primary path of travel in the bi-state metropolitan area's regional highway network and provides a direct connection to the New Jersey Turnpike and access to the West Shore Expressway, the major north-south highway on Staten Island. The bridge was completed in 1928 and by the 1980s had become functionally obsolete. Traffic across the Goethals Bridge increased an average of 33 percent annually between 1964 and 1973. Total weekday peak-period traffic volumes for both directions have increased from 7,100 to 36,600 vehicles between 1964 and 2004. Key issues identified during scoping include those related to overall need for the project, demolition of the existing bridge, potential traffic increases on local roadways, impacts to wetlands and wildlife, and displacement of residential and commercial properties. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this final EIS. The No Build Alternative assumes that operation and maintenance of the Goethals Bridge would continue and that the existing structure would require a full deck replacement and retrofit procedures for seismic upgrade within the next 7 to 10 years. Two build alternatives would place a new six-lane structure on new alignments either north or south of the existing structure's alignment. The new bridge would be constructed in its entirety, after which the existing bridge would be demolished. Two additional build alternatives would place one-half of a new six-lane structure within the existing Goethals Bridge alignment with either the southern half or northern half of the new bridge adjacent to the existing alignment. One half of the new bridge would be constructed first and would temporarily accommodate both directions of traffic during demolition of the existing bridge and construction of the second half of the new bridge. The New Alignment South is the preferred alternative. The proposed new bridge would consist of six 12-foot-wide travel lanes, a 12-foot-wide outer shoulder on each roadway, a 5-foot-wide inner shoulder on each roadway, a minimum 10-foot-wide sidewalk/bikeway along the northern edge of the westbound roadway, and a central area to be maintained between the eastbound and westbound decks to accommodate the provision of future transit service if warranted during the service life of the bridge. Navigational vertical clearance under the new bridge would be a minimum of 135 feet above mean high water and horizontal clearance would be increased from the existing 617 feet to a total of 900 feet between the two main piers. The top elevation of the two bridge towers would be 272 feet above mean sea level, and would not conflict with flight departures from Newark Liberty International Airport which is located three miles north of the bridge. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would address the deficiencies of the functionally obsolete existing bridge and would reduce the life-cycle cos