EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Environmental Assessment (EA) analyzes the Cannon Air Force Base (AFB) proposal to
provide pilots with defensive training through the use of chaff and flares in currently established
military airspace associated with Cannon AFB. The airspace includes the Pecos Military Operations
Area (MOA)/Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace (ATCAA), Sumner ATCAA, Taiban MOA,
Restricted Areas (R-5104/5105), and the northern part of Military Training Routes (MTRs) Visual
Routes (VRs)-100/125. The Defensive Training Initiative will substantially improve the defensive
response of 27th Fighter Wing (27 FW) pilots. Combat-condition training teaches defensive
maneuvers combined with the near instantaneous dispensing of defensive countermeasures such as
chaff, which confuses enemy search radars and radar-guided missiles, and flares, which decoy heatseeking missiles and sensors.
This EA was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, the Council on Environmental Quality regulations of 1978, and Air Force Instruction
(AFI) 32-7061, titled The Environmental Impact Analysis Process. As part of the scoping process
the Air Force notified agencies and the public and conducted five public meetings in New Mexico to
assist in identifying pertinent environmental issues and public concerns. During the scoping
process, input on the Defensive Training Initiative EA was obtained from federal, state, and local
agencies; elected officials; Native American tribal governments; and the general public. This EA
incorporates comments received from those agencies and persons listed above on the Draft EA
during a 30-day comment period. This comment period, from August 1 through August 31,
allowed those agencies and persons an opportunity to evaluate the proposal and the analysis
contained within the Draft EA. At the end of this document (Appendix G), are the comments
received during the public comment period and responses to these comments.
PURPOSE AND NEED
The 27 FW at Cannon AFB, New Mexico is an integral part of the United States Aerospace
Expeditionary Force (AEF) with routine deployments to the world’s “hot spots.” Pilots of the 27
FW are subjected to increasingly sophisticated tactics and equipment of hostile forces. Pilots need
combat-condition defensive training to survive these enemy tactics and equipment. For 50 years,
aircraft stationed at Cannon AFB have been assigned a combined air-to-ground and air-to-air
mission. The current F-16 aircraft continue that tradition with both an air-to-ground and an air-toair role in the AEF. At present, 27 FW pilots spend 10 to 20 percent of their training time in
airspace that permits combat-condition training. The Defensive Training Initiative would permit
chaff and/or flare use in a greater area of existing Cannon AFB-managed airspace so that 40 to 50
percent of 27 FW training could be conducted under simulated combat conditions.
PROPOSED ACTION
The proposed Defensive Training Initiative would permit the use of chaff and flares in existing
airspace contiguous to the Melrose Air Force Range (AFR) so that combat-condition training could
occur in response to available simulated ground-based and aircraft threats. Currently, pilots can use
defensive countermeasures to avoid these threats only in the restricted airspace over Melrose AFR.
The 27 FW, as the proponent for this action, proposes to conduct defensive training using chaff and
flares in the following existing military airspace: Pecos MOA/ATCAA; Sumner ATCAA; and
Executive Summary
ES-1
Defensive Training Initiative Final EA
Taiban MOA. Chaff use only is proposed for defensive training in the northern portion of
VRs-100/125. F-16 pilots from the four squadrons at Cannon AFB, pilots from the New Mexico
Air National Guard, and occasional users of the airspace would benefit from this enhanced combatcondition defensive training.
Alternatives
Three alternatives are analyzed in this EA as shown on Figure ES-1.
ALTERNATIVE A (PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE): PECOS MOA/ATCAA, TAIBAN MOA,
SUMNER ATCAA, R-5104/5105, AND VRS-100/125
Alternative A includes the use of Pecos MOA/ATCAA, Taiban MOA, R-5104/5105, and Sumner
ATCAA for defensive training dispensing of flares from 2,000 feet above ground level to
approximately 51,000 feet mean sea level and chaff from 500 feet above ground level to
approximately 51,000 feet mean sea level. Dropping flares above 2,000 feet above ground level
ensures complete burnout and reduces the potential of fire risk. The northern portion of the VRs100/125, which has existing electronic threat emitters, is proposed for defensive training using chaff
only. Use of the northern portion of VRs-100/125 would provide combat-condition training using
existing emitters that simulate enemy air defenses. Threat emitters are also located under the
MOAs, ATCAAs, and under the restricted airspace. Chaff and flare use would continue in the
restricted airspace over the Melrose AFR. Alternative A directly meets the needs of Cannon AFB
pilots through both high and low-altitude training scenarios that combine air-to-air and air-toground missions in contiguous airspaces.
ALTERNATIVE B: PECOS MOA/ATCAA, TAIBAN MOA, R-5104/5105, AND SUMNER ATCAA
Under this alternative, Pecos MOA/ATCAA, Taiban MOA, and Sumner ATCAA airspace would be
used for defensive training. Although the same amount of chaff and flares would be used under this
alternative, the area involved in dropping of chaff and flares would decrease. This would result in
about a 9 percent increase in chaff use in this airspace over that proposed under Alternative A.
Alternative B does not include defensive training using chaff in the northern portion of
VRs-100/125. Chaff and flare use would continue to take place in restricted airspace over Melrose
AFR. Alternative B would meet high-altitude training requirements although, without the MTR,
several low-altitude training needs would not be met. Without this low altitude capability, the pilots
would not experience defensive training in as many scenarios as could occur under Alternative A.
ALTERNATIVE C: NO ACTION
The No Action alternative continues limited defensive training using chaff and flares in the
restricted airspace over Melrose AFR. Under the No Action Alternative, chaff and flare use would
continue at existing rates in the restricted airspace (R-5104/5105) over Melrose AFR. No chaff or
flare use would be permitted in the Pecos MOA/ATCAA, Taiban MOA, Sumner ATCAA and
northern portions of VRs-100/125. Pilots would continue to be limited in their training against
possible enemy threats and pilots would not experience combat-condition defensive training in most
of the airspace associated with Cannon AFB.
ES-2
Executive Summary
Defensive Training Initiative Final EA
Santa Fe
Name
Floor
Ceiling
Pecos MOAs
500 AGL
17,999 MSL
Name
Floor
Ceiling
Taiban MOA
500 AGL
10,999 MSL
40
Santa Rosa
Albuquerque
Name
Name
Floor
Ceiling
Pecos ATCAA 18,000 MSL 23,999 MSL
Vaughn
R-5105
Floor
Ceiling
Surface
10,000 MSL
Clovis
Ft. Sumner
Cannon AFB
25
Portales
Name
Floor
Ceiling
VRs-100/125
500 AGL
12,500 MSL
Name
Sumner
ATCAA
Floor
Ceiling
24,000 MSL
50,999 MSL
Name
Floor
Ceiling
R-5104
Surface
25,000 MSL
Melrose Range
Roswell
El Paso
Figure ES-1. Cannon Airspace and Vicinity
Executive Summary
Page ES-3
Defensive Training Initiative Final EA
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
Environmental issues and concerns identified during scoping have been grouped into nine
environmental resource areas for analysis in this EA. Table ES-1 summarizes the potential
environmental consequences to each resource for each alternative.
Table ES-1. Defensive Training Alternative Environmental Summary
Alternative A
MOA, ATCAA,
MTR (part)
Alternative B
MOA, ATCAA
Alternative C
(No Action)
Airspace
No significant impact.
No significant impact.
No significant impact.
Safety
No chaff consequence, very
slight dud flare risk.
Same as A.
Same as A at range only.
Materials Management
No significant impact.
No significant impact.
No significant impact.
Air Quality
No significant impact.
No significant impact.
No significant impact.
Physical Resources
Constituents comparable to
soil; no discernable impact.
Same as A except chaff in
smaller area.
Same as A at range only.
Constituents comparable to
soil; no significant impacts;
non-toxic.
Same as A except chaff in
smaller area.
Same as A at range only.
Human-related
No significant impact to
ranching except slight
potential for fire from flare
misuse.
Same as A except chaff in
smaller area.
Same as A at range only.
Cultural Resources
No significant impact;
slight potential for fire from
flare misuse.
Same as A except chaff
residual components in
smaller area.
Same as A at range only.
Land Use and Visual
Resources
No land use impacts and
insignificant infrequent
visual impact from chaff or
flare residual components
(end caps).
Same as A except chaff
residual components in
smaller area.
Same as A at range only.
Environmental Justice
No minority, low-income,
or children impacts; slight
potential for encountering
dud flares; handled through
information program.
Same as A.
Same as A at range only.
Environmental Resource
Biological Resources
Natural
ES-4
Executive Summary
Defensive Training Initiative Final EA
ES-5
Executive Summary