City Center Alternative

Traffic Modeling Results

Population and Employment within the Subdistricts of 

the Study Area

Roadway Segments with More Than 10 Percent of Total 

Traffic Due to the BRAC Action

Figure 1. Traffic from the BRAC action drops to less than 

10 percent of the peak-hour traffic flow outside a 7–8 mile 

radius of Fort Belvoir. 

Figure 2. The BRAC action will increase the employment 

within the study area and help improve the balance of jobs 

to the population.

Population

Employment
Satellite Campuses Alternative

Traffic Modeling Results

Population and Employment within the Subdistricts of 

the Study Area

Roadway Segments with More Than 10 Percent of Total 

Traffic Due to the BRAC Action

Figure 1. Traffic from the BRAC action drops to less than 

10 percent of the peak-hour traffic flow outside a 7–8 mile 

radius of Fort Belvoir. 

Figure 2. The BRAC action will increase the employment 

within the study area and help improve the balance of jobs 

to the population.

Population

Employment
Possible Road Improvements to 

Mitigate of BRAC Impacts

Costs represent order-of-magnitude costs and are subject to change because of further engineering designs.
The figure below illustrates the proposed access to the EPG under the preferred alternative 

and modifications to the proposed extension of the Fairfax County Parkway through EPG.

EPG Proposed Road Improvements

Note: Final alignments of all proposed roadways will consider environmental constraints, topography 

constraints, and constructability constraints during the design process. Therefore alignments could 

change from what is shown as the design is carried forth.
Economic Impacts

BRAC construction expenditures would have 

short-term beneficial economic effects on the 

region in terms of employment, income, and 

business sales volumes (Table 1).

Population Impacts 

About 22,000 jobs would relocate to Fort Belvoir. 

The vast majority of these employees already live 

and work in the region; however, it is projected 

that some employees would relocate to live 

closer to the installation. The population changes 

would be very minor compared to current 

population projections (Table 2). Population 

increases would not be expected to occur at 

once, but over several years as jobs are

relocated to Fort Belvoir.

School Impacts 

Employees relocating within the Region of 

Influence (ROI) would affect school enrollments

(Table 3). Projected enrollment increases would 

not be expected to occur at once, but over 

several years.

Recreation Impacts 

A significant adverse socioeconomic effect on 

on-post recreation was identified. Siting new 

facilities to accommodate base realignment 

would result in loss of recreational facilities, 

including on-post golf courses and athletic fields. 

Loss of these assets would adversely impact 

quality of life and revenues for the installation’s 

Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) program.

Table 1. Estimated Regional Economic Impacts 

During Peak Construction Year

Sales volume $5.8 billion

Income $1.25 billion

Employment 25,600

Source: EIFS model

Socioeconomic Impacts

Table 2. Population Projections

Location

Total number of 

people

Percentage increase over 

current 2010 population 

projections

Arlington/Alexandria 870 0.2

Loudoun County 610 0.3

Fairfax County 9,205 0.9

Prince William County 5,015 1.3

Near South (Fredericksburg/

Stafford County) 1,965 1.9

Prince Georges County 1,090 0.1

Table 3. School Enrollment Projections

Location

Total 

increase in 

number of 

children

Percent 

of current 

enrollment

Nursery or 

preschool 

age

Elementary 

school

Middle 

school

High 

school

Arlington/

Alexandria 420 1.4 105 105 105 105

Loudoun County 300 0.7 75 75 75 75

Fairfax County 4,340 2.6 1,085 1,085 1,085 1,085

Prince William 

County 2,360 3.3 590 590 590 590

Near South 

(Fredericksburg/

Stafford 

County)

920 3.3 230 230 230 230

Prince George’s 

County 520 0.4 130 130 130 130
Air Quality

A General Conformity 

Determination (GCD) is 

an assessment of whether 

emissions related to a 

federal action interfere 

with the state’s ability 

to meet specific air 

quality goals. A State 

Implementation Plan 

(SIP) is a document 

that defines how a state 

intends to meet air quality 

standards in compliance 

with the Clean Air Act. The Draft GCD, prepared concurrently 

with the Draft EIS, demonstrates that the emissions associated 

with the proposed action conform to the purpose and intent of 

Virginia’s SIP.

Comparison of 2010 project-related emissions and 

regional inventories

Pollutant

SIP regional emission 

inventory (tons/

summer weekday)

Project-related nonroad emissions (tons/

summer weekday)

Percent of regional 

emissions

Approved 1-hour SIP

Nitrogen oxides 82.8 1.58 1.9%

Volatile organic 

compounds 147.3 0.98 0.7%

Draft 8-hour SIP

Nitrogen oxides 76.9 1.58 2.1%

Volatile organic 

compounds 191.8 0.98 0.5%

 BMPs and Mitigation

BMPs would be required and implemented for both construction 

emissions and stationary point source emissions. BMPs to control 

fugitive particle emissions implemented during construction 

could include

Using water for controlling of dust in the demolition of existing 

buildings or structures, construction operations, grading roads, 

or clearing of land

Applying water on dirt roads, materials stockpiles, and other 

surfaces that might create airborne dust

Paving roadways and maintaining them in a clean condition

Covering open equipment for conveying or transporting material 

likely to create objectionable air pollution when airborne

Promptly removing spilled or tracked dirt or other materials 

from paved streets

BMPs and mitigation associated with the new boilers and 

generators would include

Using Best Available Control Technologies

Obtaining air quality construction and operating permits 

For the City Center and Town Center Alternatives, 

a Nonattainment New Source Review permit and 

corresponding mitigation (i.e., offset credits from other air 

quality control regions) would be required

















Mobile Emissions 

The realignment of Fort Belvoir would decrease both the number 

of vehicles and, subsequently the total vehicle miles traveled within 

the National Capital Region (NCR). These reductions in emissions 

would constitute an ongoing net benefit to the region’s air quality. 

This decrease would be primarily because of the relocation of 

1,700 personnel currently at Fort Belvoir to locations outside 

the region. Although the number of personnel at Fort Belvoir 

are expected to increase, the new personnel and the miles they 

commute are already within the NCR. 

New Stationary Sources of Emissions 

The new stationary sources of emissions will be primarily boilers 

for heating and emergency generators for the proposed facilities. 
Natural Resource Impacts

Impacts

The table below summarizes overall expected impacts on 

natural resources. Potential effects are expressed in acres.

Natural Resource

Preferred 

Alternative

Town Center 

Alternative

City Center 

Alternative

Satellite 

Campuses 

Alternative

Wetlands 2 1 2 3

Resource 

Protection Areas 14 18 14 44

Riparian buffers 6 11 4 24

Wildlife corridor 0 0 0 0

Sensitive flora 

habitat 8 0 8 0

Sensitive fauna 

habitat 6 2 6 2

EPG 

Environmental 

Quality Corridor

21 0 21 0

Note: The No Action Alternative has no potential impacts; thus, it is not 

included in this table.

/

Sensitive Environmental Areas

Installation Property

LEGEND

§ ̈¦95

£¤1

0 0.5 1

Miles

Jackson Miles Abbott 

 Wetland Refuge

Environmental 

Quality Corridor

 Forest and 

Wildlife Corridor

Accotink Bay

Wildlife Refuge

Wildlife Refuge Area

Wildlife Management Area

Environmental Quality Corridor

Forest and Wildlife Corridor

PIF Priority Bird Habitat

Best Management Practices

and Mitigation

Best Management Practices (BMPs) and

mitigation would be similar for each of the 

alternatives and would include the following:

 Obtain permits for wetland disturbance 

	Plan and construct storm water, erosion control, and 

pollutant-removal BMPs

	Prepare soil erosion and sediment control plans and 

storm water pollution prevention plans

	During and following construction activities, 

minimize erosion and sedimentation until sites have 

stabilized 

	For erosion-prone areas, employ integrated BMPs 

to capture sediments that could enter streams, 

wetlands, and Resource Protection Areas (RPAs)

	Implement low-impact development (LID) 

management practices that seek to reduce impervious 

cover and control storm water runoff as close to the 

source as feasible. This could include measures such as

	Man-made wetlands (runoff could not be diverted 

to natural wetlands for storm water management)

	Restore riparian buffers for management of 

nonpoint (unconcentrated) runoff (when within an 

RPA), following coordination with local regulators

	Site-specific controls, such as linear sand filters or 

biofilters for water quality management of hot spot 

areas such as parking lots

	Develop a storm water drainage system master plan 

study for the installation

	Participate in Fairfax County’s Watershed Planning 

Process and in Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) 

studies with Virginia Department of Environmental 

Quality (VDEQ)

	Limit construction to activities during normal weekday 

business hours in areas adjacent to noise-sensitive 

land uses such as residential areas, recreational areas, 

and off-post areas
Preferred Alternative

Town Center

Alternative

City Center

Alternative

Satellite Campuses 

Alternative

 Potential adverse visual 

impact to historic district 

on South Post including: 

 Impacts on golf course 

from construction of 

hospital

 NRHP Archeological site 

potentially eligible for 

listing on the NRHP

 Potential adverse visual 

impact on Friends Meeting 

House and cemetery on 

North Post

 Potential adverse visual 

impact to historic district 

on South Post including

 Impacts on golf course

 Potentially eligible 

archeological site

 Woodlawn United 

Methodist Church 

Cemetery could have 

adverse visual impacts

 Three more potentially 

eligible archeological sites 

would be effected

 Adverse effects on 

potentially eligible historic 

buildings

 Three more potentially 

eligible archeological 

sites would be affected 

on North Post than in 

Preferred Alternative

 No impact on South Post 

Golf Course, Friends 

Meeting House and 

cemetery 

 Potentially eligible airfield 

historic structures could 

be adversely affected

 Woodlawn United 

Methodist Church 

Cemetery could have 

adverse visual impacts

 Three more potentially 

eligible archeological 

sites would be impacted 

on North Post than in 

Preferred Alternative

 The potentially eligible 

golf course, Fort Belvoir 

Historic District, Friends 

Meeting House and 

cemetery would not have 

adverse visual impacts

Note: The No Action Alternative has no potential impacts; thus, it is not included in this table.

The table below summarizes overall expected impacts on cultural resources for all alternatives.

Cultural Resources: 

Impacts, BMPs, and Mitigation

Best Management Practices and Mitigation

 Conduct renovation activities in a manner that preserves the historical and 

architectural integrity of the property and surrounding historic district 

 Design landscapes, streetscapes, lighting, and signage to minimize visual intrusion

 Use vegetation, topography, and other methods to screen the views of new 

buildings from historic properties

 Conduct detailed recording of adversely affected on-post historic properties
Project Name Building Size

26) Museum of the U.S. Army Alternative Locations: .......300,300 SF

A) North Post

B) Pence Gate

31) INSCOM Information Dominance Center...................300,000 SF

32) Expand and Renovate Post Exchange (PX)................ 186,000 SF

3) Physical Fitness Center (Troop Cantonment Area)...... 150,800 SF

29) Operations Security Evaluation

 Group Training Facility............................................ 130,000 SF

10) Museum Support Center (MSC)............................... 124,800 SF

27) DCEETA Remote Delivery Facility...............................99,000 SF

22) South Post Fitness Facility & Multipurpose Fields .........95,300 SF

8) JPRA Renovation/Addition .........................................87,742 SF

25) Physical Fitness Center (EPG)....................................70,800 SF

20) Soldier Support Center.............................................68,700 SF

7) Administrative Building for the PEO Soldier .................68,000 SF

30) Fairfax County Parkway Extension ...................................... n/a

1) Woodlawn Connector Road................................................ n/a

A complete project list is included in your welcome packet.

Largest Cumulative On-Post Projects

(NOTE: The numbers preceding the projects indicate their location on the map)

Cumulative Impacts

Proposed On-Post Development Projects

The following is a list of on-post projects that are not included as part of BRAC action. 

Separate NEPA documents have been or will be prepared for each.

Proposed On-Post Development Projects Legend

8 Project Location

Installation Property
Cumulative Impacts

Proposed Off-Post Development Projects

The map shows locations of the 

projects within 3 miles of Fort 

Belvoir. 

The following is a list of off-post 

projects that have been evaluated 

as cumulative impacts in the 

EIS. The numbers preceding the 

projects indicate their location on 

the map.

Project Name Acreage

29) Laurel Hill Golf Course Expansion ............................................................348.6

69) South Run Recreational Center Fitness Center Addition ..............................182.3 

185) Mixed Use Development (Residential, Office, Recreation/open Space, Retail) 160.5 

33) Mount Vernon Country Club Golf Course Improvements ............................. 127.7 

186) Mixed Use (Office, Industrial) .................................................................. 117.8 

144) Occoquan Overlook ................................................................................100.6 

182) Springfield Mall Expansion .........................................................................82.0 

153) South County High School ........................................................................69.4 

172) Cook Inlet Residential Section Three ..........................................................60.6 

155) Spring Hill Senior Campus .........................................................................59.7 

78) Lorton Work House ..................................................................................52.1 

151) Laurel Hill South Landbays E and F, Section 1 ............................................ 48.0 

59) Spring Hill Senior Campus Senior Housing Building ..................................... 46.8

177) Gunston Commerce Center Land Bay C ......................................................39.0

104) Lakewood Hills Sect 10 Phase I .................................................................35.1

150) Laurel Hill South Landbay D Section 2 (MV) ............................................... 33.2

152) Laurel Hill South Landbay E and F Section 2 ...............................................33.0

143) Nirvana Palace ........................................................................................ 30.3

100) Highgrove Estates Section 5 ......................................................................26.9

95) Adkins Property .......................................................................................25.7

!!

!

!

! !!

!

!

! !

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

!

!

!

! !

! !

! !

! !!

!

!

!

!

! !

! ! !

!

! !

! !

! !

!

!

! !

! !

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

! !

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

! !

!

!

!!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!! !

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

! !

!

! !

!

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

!!!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

! !

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

Franconia Rd

Franconia-Springfield Pkwy

Telegraph Road

§ ̈¦95

7100

£¤1

§ ̈¦495

7100

123

2

8

6

9 7

5

4

3

1

73

24 26

95

94

85

83

63

45

13

21

23

48

71

22

49

77

92

76

75

56

47

20

66

10

11

68

67

57

27

81

96

34

33 32

91

89 18

43

65

86

41

42

17

88

19 90

44

74

60

39 98

38

40

64

99

70

87

14

15

16

55

25

31

30

53

52

80

79

61

36

62

84

50 51

54

59

82

35

37

69

97

12

72

58

93

46 28 29

78

178

118

109

184

187

183

182

185

181

186

177

173

163164

155 154

152 151

149

148 147

134

108

117

179

139

138

135

115

116

146 114

113

137

161

136

103

101 100

102

110

112

111

132

133

107

127

126

131

106

124

125

129

130

128

172

120

121

123

157

162

160

159 158

168

171

167

176

169

175

174 170

105

119

122

165

166

180

104

140 141

150

156

145 144 153

143

/

EPG

Fort Belvoir

LEGEND Proposed Development Projects Surrounding Fort Belvoir

Proposed Projects < 25 acres

Proposed Projects > 25 acres

!

!

Potomac River

0 1 2

Miles

Cumulative Off-Post Projects at Least 25 Acres in Size

Land Use Summary for Proposed 

Off-Post Development Projects

Land use Acreage

Professional/Institutional 546

Residential 1,150

Commercial/Light Industry 291

Public/Community 394

TOTAL 2,381

A complete project list is included in your welcome packet.
Written Comments

The Final EIS will address comments submitted during the comment period. A 60-day public comment 

period is underway and will allow input from the public on the alternatives and analyses presented 

in the Draft EIS (DEIS). The Army will make the Final EIS available for 30 days. A Record of Decision 

(ROD) will then be signed. The Fort Belvoir BRAC Web site (www.BelvoirBRAC-EIS.net) will be 

updated regularly as a means to keep the public informed of the most current information regarding the 

BRAC action at Fort Belvoir.

If you would like to submit written comments on the DEIS, please complete a hard copy Comment 

Form and place it (or your previously prepared comments) in the box. 

If you wish to submit comments later, you may use the following methods:

Online Comment Form:

Go to the www.BelvoirBRAC-EIS.net Web site and click on Submit Comments

E-mail: environmental@belvoir.army.mil

Mail:

Mr. Patrick McLaughlin

Fort Belvoir Directorate of Public Works

Evironmental and Natural Resources Division

9430 Jackson Loop, Suite 100

Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5116

ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED OR POSTMARKED BY MAY 1, 2007.






Oral Comments

The Final EIS will address all comments received during the comment 

period. A 60-day public comment period is underway and will allow input 

from the public on the alternatives and analyses presented in the DEIS. 

The Army will make the Final EIS available for public review no less than 

30 days before issuing the Record of Decision (ROD). The Fort Belvoir 

BRAC Web site (www.BelvoirBRAC-EIS.net) will be updated regularly 

as a means to keep the public informed of the most current information 

regarding the BRAC action at Fort Belvoir.

Oral comments on the DEIS will be recorded for the public record. You 

may submit oral comments to the court reporter at this station.
EIS Milestones

1. Define proposed action, alternatives, and decisions to be made.

2. Identify what needs to be analyzed (scoping); refine proposed action and 

alternatives. 

3. Gather data, conduct analysis, and identify environmental effects 

of proposed action and alternatives. 

4. Conduct Public Information Meeting.

5. Publish Draft EIS for public and agency review. The 

hard copy at various locations.Draft EIS will be available online in PDF format and in 

6. Conduct 45-day public comment period. (The 

this EIS.)Army has opted for a 60-day review period for 

7. Conduct public meeting on the Draft 

comments.EIS to solicit public and agency 

8. Address comments, 

publish Final EIS.

9. The Final EIS will be 

available for 30 days.

10. Publish ROD.

BRAC Environmental Impact Statement
What is BRAC?

Congress passed a law authorizing Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) recommendations at Department of Defense (DoD) installations in November 2005—the fifth BRAC round 

since 1988. The purpose of the BRAC recommendations was to authorize another round 

of realignments and closures to keep up with 

evolving global security requirements. The 

BRAC action at Fort Belvoir includes relocating 

59 DoD agencies and activities, primarily from 

the DC metropolitan area, onto Fort Belvoir.

What is the National Environmental

Policy Act?

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

of 1969 requires the analysis of potential 

environmental effects associated with major 

federal actions. Federal agencies must identify potential impacts on resources such as 

water, air, wildlife, cultural resources, land 

use, recreation, and aesthetics, and consider 

alternatives to the proposed action. NEPA also 

requires that the responsible federal official 

consult with relevant federal and state agencies, federally recognized tribes, and the public 

to determine these impacts.

Two NEPA documents will be created in the 

course of this action:

• An Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS) that analyzes any potential significant 

environmental and socioeconomic impacts 

associated with implementing the BRAC 

recommendations and the updated land use 

plan portion of the Master Plan’s Long Range 

Component. 

• A Record of Decision (ROD) that 

documents the final decision on the 

proposed action, on the basis of the 

information presented in the EIS. It may 

specify mitigation measures (methods to 

lessen negative impacts) and monitoring 

programs to be undertaken.

What is the purpose of this public 

meeting?

The purpose of this meeting is to solicit written and oral comments and suggestions concerning the alternatives and analyses in the 

Draft EIS (DEIS).

Comments received at the public meeting and 

during the public comment period will be used 

during preparation of the Final EIS. 

What is the meeting format and what

topics will be addressed?

This meeting will be held in a public hearing 

format. Meeting participants will sign in at the 

registration table and fill out a card stating if 

they would like to speak at the meeting according to the protocol. Informational displays 

will be set up in the lobby outside the auditorium where technical staff will be available to 

answer questions and discuss the DEIS. Inside 

the auditorium speakers will be called to the 

microphone one at a time to give statements. 

A court reporter will record the entire meeting proceedings. A second court reporter will 

be available to take oral comments outside the 

auditorium for those who do not wish to speak 

in front of the audience or whose comments 

exceed the time limit. 

What is the Proposed Action?

The BRAC Commission proposed that the Army 

realign Fort Belvoir according to BRAC law. 

The DEIS analyzes impacts associated with 

implementing the BRAC recommendations 

and relocating approximately 22,000 workers 

to Fort Belvoir. Because of the large scope of 

these recommendations, the land use portion 

of the installation’s Master Plan long range 

component must be updated to accommodate 

BRAC realignment activities on Fort Belvoir. 

Therefore, the DEIS evaluates alternative land 

use plans to accommodate the following BRAC 

2005 requirements, and impacts associated 

with siting of the BRAC realignment activities.

• National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency 

(NGA) and Washington Headquarters 

Services (WHS) leased and governmentowned facilities within the National Capital 

Region (NCR)

• Primary and secondary medical care 

functions from Walter Reed Medical Center 

to a new, expanded Dewitt Army Community 

Hospital

• Other Army and DoD organizations from 

NCR leased space
What is BRAC?

Congress passed a law authorizing Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) recommendations at Department of Defense (DoD) installations in November 2005—the fifth BRAC round 

since 1988. The purpose of the BRAC recommendations was to authorize another round 

of realignments and closures to keep up with 

evolving global security requirements. The 

BRAC action at Fort Belvoir includes relocating 

59 DoD agencies and activities, primarily from 

the DC metropolitan area, onto Fort Belvoir.

What is the National Environmental

Policy Act?

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

of 1969 requires the analysis of potential 

environmental effects associated with major 

federal actions. Federal agencies must identify potential impacts on resources such as 

water, air, wildlife, cultural resources, land 

use, recreation, and aesthetics, and consider 

alternatives to the proposed action. NEPA also 

requires that the responsible federal official 

consult with relevant federal and state agencies, federally recognized tribes, and the public 

to determine these impacts.

Two NEPA documents will be created in the 

course of this action:

• An Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS) that analyzes any potential significant 

environmental and socioeconomic impacts 

associated with implementing the BRAC 

recommendations and the updated land use 

plan portion of the Master Plan’s Long Range 

Component. 

• A Record of Decision (ROD) that 

documents the final decision on the 

proposed action, on the basis of the 

information presented in the EIS. It may 

specify mitigation measures (methods to 

lessen negative impacts) and monitoring 

programs to be undertaken.

What is the purpose of this public 

meeting?

The purpose of this meeting is to solicit written and oral comments and suggestions concerning the alternatives and analyses in the 

Draft EIS (DEIS).

Comments received at the public meeting and 

during the public comment period will be used 

during preparation of the Final EIS. 

What is the meeting format and what

topics will be addressed?

This meeting will be held in a public hearing 

format. Meeting participants will sign in at the 

registration table and fill out a card stating if 

they would like to speak at the meeting according to the protocol. Informational displays 

will be set up in the lobby outside the auditorium where technical staff will be available to 

answer questions and discuss the DEIS. Inside 

the auditorium speakers will be called to the 

microphone one at a time to give statements. 

A court reporter will record the entire meeting proceedings. A second court reporter will 

be available to take oral comments outside the 

auditorium for those who do not wish to speak 

in front of the audience or whose comments 

exceed the time limit. 

What is the Proposed Action?

The BRAC Commission proposed that the Army 

realign Fort Belvoir according to BRAC law. 

The DEIS analyzes impacts associated with 

implementing the BRAC recommendations 

and relocating approximately 22,000 workers 

to Fort Belvoir. Because of the large scope of 

these recommendations, the land use portion 

of the installation’s Master Plan long range 

component must be updated to accommodate 

BRAC realignment activities on Fort Belvoir. 

Therefore, the DEIS evaluates alternative land 

use plans to accommodate the following BRAC 

2005 requirements, and impacts associated 

with siting of the BRAC realignment activities.

• National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency 

(NGA) and Washington Headquarters 

Services (WHS) leased and governmentowned facilities within the National Capital 

Region (NCR)

• Primary and secondary medical care 

functions from Walter Reed Medical Center 

to a new, expanded Dewitt Army Community 

Hospital

• Other Army and DoD organizations from 

NCR leased space
fine proposed action, alternatives, and decisions to be made.

2. Identify what needs to be analyzed (scoping); refine proposed action and 

alternatives. 

3. Gather data, conduct analysis, and identify environmental effects 

of proposed action and alternatives. 

4. Conduct Public Information Meeting.

5. Publish Draft EIS for public and agency review. The 

Draft EIS will be available online in PDF format and in hard copy at various locations.

6. Conduct 45-day public comment period. (The 

Army has opted for a 60-day review period for this EIS.)

7. Conduct public meeting on the Draft 

EIS to solicit public and agency comments.

8. Address comments, 

publish Final EIS.

9. The Final EIS will be 

available for 30 days.

10. Publish ROD.