Final
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
JOINT PRIMARY AIRCRAFT
TRAINING SYSTEM (JPATS)/
T-6A BEDDOWN
MOODY AFB, GEORGIA
United States Air Force
Headquarters Air Combat Command
March 2000
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ACAM
ACC
ACOE
ACS
AETC
AFB
AFI
AGE
AGL
AICUZ
APZ
AQCR
ARFF
ARTCC
ATC
BAI
BAM
BASH
BEA
BDU
BRAAT
CAA
CATEX
CEQ
CFR
CITS
CO
CRMP
CSAR
CWA
dB
dBA
DNL
DNLmr
DoD
DOT
EA
EIAP
EIS
EO
EPA
ERP
ESA
ºF
FAA
FAR
FDEP
FFWCC
FICON
FICUN
FNAI
FONPA
FONSI
FS
FW
FY
g
gpm
GDNR
GPS
HAP
IFF
IFR
ILS
JPATS
JPPT
KIAS
LATN
Lmax
m3
mm
Air Conformity Applicability Model
Air Combat Command
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Air Control Squadron
Air Education and Training Command
Air Force Base
Air Force Instruction
aerospace ground equipment
above ground level
Air Installation Compatible Use Zone
Accident Potential Zone
Air Quality Control Region
Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting
Air Route Traffic Control Center
Air Traffic Control
Backup Aircraft Inventory
Bird Avoidance Model
bird-aircraft strike hazard
Bureau of Economic Analysis
bomb dummy unit
Base Recovery After Attack
Clean Air Act
Categorical Exclusion
Council on Environmental Quality
Code of Federal Regulations
Combat Information Transport System
carbon monoxide
Cultural Resources Management Plan
Combat Search and Rescue
Clean Water Act
decibel
A-weighted decibel
day-night average sound level
onset rate adjusted monthly day-night average sound level
Department of Defense
Department of Transportation
environmental assessment
Environmental Impact Analysis Process
environmental impact statement
Executive Order
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Restoration Program
Endangered Species Act
degree Fahrenheit
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Aviation Regulation
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Federal Interagency Committee on Noise
Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise
Florida Natural Areas Inventory
Finding of No Practicable Alternative
Finding of No Significant Impact
Fighter Squadron
Fighter Wing
fiscal year
gram
gallons per minute
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
global positioning system
hazardous air pollutant
Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals
instrument flight rules
instrument landing system
Joint Primary Aircraft Training System
Joint Primary Pilot Training
knots indicated air speed
Low Altitude Tactical Navigation
maximum sound level
cubic meter
millimeter
MAILS
MOA
MSL
MTR
NAAQS
NEPA
NFA
NHP
NM
NO2
NOx
NOTAM
NRHP
N/S
NWR
O3
PAA
PAI
Pb
PCPI
% HA
PM2.5
PM10
POL
ppm
PSD
QDR
RAPCON
RCRA
ROI
RPZ
RQS
RWY
SEL
SFG
SGRA
SHPO
SIP
SO2
SOx
SULMA
SUPT
TFW
TNC
TPI
µg
µg/m3
USBC
USDA
USFWS
V
VFR
VOC
VPD
VR
WG
WMA
Multiple Aircraft Instantaneous Line Source
Military Operations Area
mean sea level
Military Training Route
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
National Environmental Policy Act
No Further Action
Natural Heritage Program
nautical mile
nitrogen dioxide
nitrogen oxides
Notice to Airmen
National Register of Historic Places
North and South
National Wildlife Refuge
ozone
Primary Aircraft Authorization
Primary Aircraft Inventory
lead
per capita personal income
percent highly annoyed
particulate matter < 2.5 micrometers in diameter
particulate matter < 10 micrometers in diameter
petroleum, oils, and lubricants
parts per million
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Quadrennial Defense Review
Radar Approach Control
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
region of influence
Runway Protection Zone
Rescue Squadron
runway
sound exposure level
Security Forces Group
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport
State Historic Preservation Officer
State Implementation Plan
sulfur dioxide
sulfur oxides
Special Use Land Management Area
Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training
Tactical Fighter Wing
The Nature Conservancy
total personal income
microgram
microgram per cubic meter
U.S. Bureau of the Census
U.S. Department of Agriculture
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Victor Route
visual flight rules
volatile organic compound
vehicles per day
Visual Route
Wing
Wildlife Management Area
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This environmental assessment (EA) evaluates the potential environmental impacts of a proposed U.S.
Department of the Air Force (Air Force) force structure action at Moody Air Force Base (AFB), Georgia.
The proposed action would:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Establish Joint Primary Pilot Training (JPPT) and beddown the associated Joint Primary Aircraft
Training System (JPATS) at Moody AFB. This would add a total of 49 T-6A aircraft and 444
manpower authorizations to Moody AFB;
Renovate existing facilities and construct new facilities at Moody AFB to accommodate JPATS
squadron operations, classroom training activities, and maintenance activities for T-6A aircraft;
Conduct parasail training operations at Bemiss Field in conjunction with the JPPT course;
Conduct sortie-operations by T-6A aircraft within the Moody 1 Military Operations Area (MOA),
Moody 3 MOA, Live Oak MOA, Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) area, and along two
military training routes (MTRs): Visual Route 1065 (VR-1065) and VR-1066;
Establish mutual use agreements with five civilian airfields in the vicinity of Moody AFB for the
purposes of T-6A transition training, including the practice of multiple overhead patterns,
emergency landing patterns, and instrument approaches;
Change the airspace utilization of Moody 2 North and South MOAs by T-38 aircraft associated
with the Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals (IFF) pilot training program; and
Assign 10 T-38 aircraft as Backup Aircraft Inventory (BAI), increasing the total number of T-38
aircraft at Moody AFB to 67. No operational changes would occur.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCESS
This EA was prepared by the U.S. Air Force, Headquarters Air Combat Command in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations
implementing NEPA, and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 32-7061. The environmental impact analysis
process for the proposed action and alternatives includes the following steps:
•
•
•
•
Collect data for the existing environment and assess the potential impacts of the proposed action
and alternatives;
Prepare and distribute a Draft EA for public and agency review and comment;
Prepare and distribute a Final EA, incorporating comments received on the Draft EA; and
Publish a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), if appropriate, which summarizes the results
of the EA analysis.
DECISION TO BE MADE AND THE DECISION-MAKER
Based on the analysis documented in this EA, the Air Force will make one of the following decisions
regarding the proposed action:
1) choose the proposed action and sign a FONSI, allowing implementation of the proposed action;
2) initiate the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) if it is determined that
significant impacts to the affected environment would occur upon implementation of the
proposed action or alternatives; or
3) select the no-action alternative, in which no action would be implemented.
Executive Summary
ES-1
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE ACTION
The purpose of the proposed action is to establish a JPPT program at Moody AFB. The Air Force is
currently experiencing a shortage of pilots due to a higher than expected pilot attrition and separation rate.
To meet this higher than expected loss of Air Force pilots, the Air Force is increasing the number of
student pilots entering the JPPT program. Since existing Air Education and Training Command (AETC)
installations are at maximum capacity for this pilot training program, other Air Force installations must be
considered for pilot training.
PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES
The proposed action analyzed in this EA consists of the establishment of the JPPT program and the
beddown of the associated T-6A aircraft at Moody AFB, the change in airspace utilization of Moody 2
North and South MOAs by Moody-based T-38 aircraft, the use of civil airports in the vicinity of Moody
AFB for transition training by student pilots associated with the JPPT program, and the assignment of 10
T-38 BAI aircraft to Moody AFB. Though changes in airspace use would occur upon implementation of
the proposed action, there would be no changes to the structure of any airspace or range used by Moody
AFB aircrews. As part of the proposed action, building renovations and construction at Moody AFB
would be necessary to support JPPT program operations. The alternative to the proposed action is the noaction alternative, under which the establishment of the JPPT program, beddown of T-6A aircraft at
Moody AFB, and change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
This EA provides an analysis of the potential environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the
proposed action or no-action alternative. Fourteen resource categories were thoroughly evaluated to
identify potential environmental impacts. As shown in Table ES-1, implementation of the proposed
action or no-action alternative would not result in significant impacts to any resource area. Overall,
implementing the proposed action or no-action alternative would not substantially change baseline
environmental conditions at Moody AFB or the region of influence associated with the proposed action or
no-action alternative.
Table ES-1. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Action or No-Action Alternative
EA Section
Resource
Proposed Action
No-Action Alternative
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
Airspace
Noise
Air Quality
Safety
Hazardous Materials and Wastes
Earth Resources
Water Resources
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Socioeconomics
Environmental Justice
Land Use
Recreation and Visual Resources
Transportation
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
❍
Classifications: ❍ No significant impacts; ● Significant impacts
ES-2
Executive Summary
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FINAL
T-6A BEDDOWN EA
MOODY AFB, GA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................................ES-1
1.0
2.0
3.0
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION...................................................... 1-1
1.1
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1-1
1.2
BACKGROUND...................................................................................................................1-1
1.2.1 Moody AFB..............................................................................................................1-1
1.2.2 Joint Primary Pilot Training Course Characteristics ................................................1-3
1.3
PURPOSE AND NEED ........................................................................................................1-4
1.4
REGULATORY COMPLIANCE .........................................................................................1-4
1.5
ORGANIZATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT....................................1-4
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES .................................... 2-1
2.1
PROPOSED ACTION...........................................................................................................2-1
2.1.1 Aircraft Characteristics.............................................................................................2-1
2.1.2 Aircraft Inventory.....................................................................................................2-3
2.1.3 Proposed Aircraft Operations...................................................................................2-4
2.1.4 Personnel Changes ...................................................................................................2-8
2.1.5 Construction and Renovation Projects .....................................................................2-9
2.2
ALTERNATIVES ...............................................................................................................2-11
2.2.1 Alternatives Carried Forward.................................................................................2-12
2.2.2 Alternatives Considered but Not Carried Forward.................................................2-12
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1
AIRSPACE............................................................................................................................3-1
3.1.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.........................................................................................3-4
3.1.2 Airspace....................................................................................................................3-4
3.1.3 Transition Training Airports ..................................................................................3-14
3.2
NOISE .................................................................................................................................3-17
3.2.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-19
3.2.2 Airspace..................................................................................................................3-21
3.2.3 Transition Training Airports ..................................................................................3-21
3.3
AIR QUALITY ...................................................................................................................3-25
3.3.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-29
3.3.2 Airspace..................................................................................................................3-31
3.3.3 Transition Training Airports ..................................................................................3-31
3.4
SAFETY..............................................................................................................................3-35
3.4.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-35
3.4.2 Grand Bay Range, MOAs, and MTRs ...................................................................3-36
Table of Contents
i
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.4.3
Transition Training Airports ..................................................................................3-37
3.5
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND HAZARDOUS WASTES ........................................3-39
3.5.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-39
3.6
EARTH RESOURCES........................................................................................................3-43
3.6.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-43
3.7
WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................................3-45
3.7.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-45
3.8
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.............................................................................................3-47
3.8.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-48
3.8.2 Airspace..................................................................................................................3-51
3.8.3 Transition Training Airports ..................................................................................3-54
3.9
CULTURAL RESOURCES................................................................................................3-63
3.9.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-64
3.9.2 Airspace..................................................................................................................3-65
3.9.3 Transition Training Airports ..................................................................................3-65
3.10 SOCIOECONOMICS..........................................................................................................3-67
3.10.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-67
3.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE..........................................................................................3-73
3.11.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-73
3.11.2 Airspace..................................................................................................................3-74
3.11.3 Transition Training Airports ..................................................................................3-75
3.12 LAND USE .........................................................................................................................3-77
3.12.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.......................................................................................3-77
3.12.2 Airspace..................................................................................................................3-80
3.12.3 Transition Training Airports ..................................................................................3-97
3.13 RECREATION AND VISUAL RESOURCES ................................................................3-103
3.13.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.....................................................................................3-103
3.13.2 Airspace................................................................................................................3-104
3.13.3 Transition Training Airports ................................................................................3-105
3.14 TRANSPORTATION .......................................................................................................3-107
3.14.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity.....................................................................................3-107
4.0
ii
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS................................................................................................. 4-1
4.1
AIRSPACE............................................................................................................................4-1
4.1.1 Proposed Action .......................................................................................................4-1
4.1.2 No-Action Alternative..............................................................................................4-4
4.2
NOISE ...................................................................................................................................4-5
4.2.1 Proposed Action .......................................................................................................4-5
4.2.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-11
4.3
AIR QUALITY ...................................................................................................................4-13
4.3.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-13
4.3.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-22
4.4
SAFETY..............................................................................................................................4-23
4.4.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-23
4.4.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-25
Table of Contents
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.5
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND HAZARDOUS WASTES ........................................4-27
4.5.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-27
4.5.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-29
4.6
EARTH RESOURCES........................................................................................................4-31
4.6.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-31
4.6.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-31
4.7
WATER RESOURCES.......................................................................................................4-33
4.7.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-33
4.7.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-33
4.8
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.............................................................................................4-35
4.8.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-35
4.8.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-38
4.9
CULTURAL RESOURCES................................................................................................4-39
4.9.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-39
4.9.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-40
4.10 SOCIOECONOMICS..........................................................................................................4-41
4.10.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-41
4.10.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-43
4.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE..........................................................................................4-45
4.11.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-45
4.11.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-46
4.12 LAND USE .........................................................................................................................4-47
4.12.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-47
4.12.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-47
4.13 RECREATION AND VISUAL RESOURCES ..................................................................4-49
4.13.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-49
4.13.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-50
4.14 TRANSPORTATION .........................................................................................................4-51
4.14.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................................4-51
4.14.2 No-Action Alternative............................................................................................4-51
5.0
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS.......................................................................................................... 5-1
5.1
DEFINITION OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS .....................................................................5-1
5.1.1 Scope of Cumulative Effects Analysis .....................................................................5-1
5.2
PAST, PRESENT, AND REASONABLY FORESEEABLE ACTIONS.............................5-2
5.2.1 Past Actions Relevant to the Proposed Action .........................................................5-2
5.2.2 Present Actions Relevant to the Proposed Action....................................................5-2
5.2.3 Reasonably Foreseeable Actions at Moody AFB (Federal Actions)........................5-4
5.2.4 Other Reasonably Foreseeable Actions near Moody AFB (Non-Federal Actions) .5-4
5.2.5 Other Federal Actions ..............................................................................................5-4
5.3
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ANALYSIS ..............................................................................5-5
5.3.1 Cecil Field Naval Air Station Closure......................................................................5-5
5.3.2 Force Structure Actions............................................................................................5-5
5.3.3 Temporary Use of AT-38Bs with BDU-33s ............................................................5-6
5.3.4 ACC Air Control Squadron Action ..........................................................................5-6
5.3.5 State Route 125/Bemiss Road ..................................................................................5-6
Table of Contents
iii
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
5.3.6
5.3.7
5.3.8
5.3.9
Base Recovery After Attack (BRAAT) Strip Construction .....................................5-6
Compost Pad Construction.......................................................................................5-6
Beddown of the 820 SFG .........................................................................................5-6
F-16 Drawdown........................................................................................................5-7
5.4
SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS .......................................................................5-7
6.0
IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES................ 6-1
7.0
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................. 7-1
8.0
PERSONS CONTACTED............................................................................................................ 8-1
9.0
LIST OF PREPARERS................................................................................................................ 9-1
APPENDIX A: AIRCRAFT NOISE ANALYSIS ...............................................................................A-1
APPENDIX B: AIRSPACE...................................................................................................................B-1
APPENDIX C: AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE..............................................................................C-1
iv
Table of Contents
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
LIST OF FIGURES
Number
1.2-1
2.1-1
2.1-2
2.1-3
3.1-1
3.1-2
3.1-3
3.1-4
3.1-5
3.1-6
3.1-7
3.2-1
3.3-1
3.8-1
3.8-2
3.8-3
3.8-4
3.8-5
3.8-6
3.8-7
3.12-1
3.12-2
3.12-3
3.12-4
3.12-5
3.12-6
3.12-7a
3.12-7b
3.12-8
3.12-9a
3.12-9b
3.12-9c
3.12-9d
3.12-9e
3.12-10
3.12-11
3.12-12
3.12-13
3.12-14
3.12-15
3.14-1
4.2-1
5.1-1
Page
Location of Moody AFB, Georgia............................................................................................. 1-2
Moody AFB Base Map.............................................................................................................. 2-2
Affected Airspace ...................................................................................................................... 2-6
Location of Proposed Construction and Renovation Projects at Moody AFB ........................ 2-10
Affected Airspace ...................................................................................................................... 3-6
Moody 1 MOA .......................................................................................................................... 3-7
Moody 2 North and South MOAs ............................................................................................. 3-8
Moody 3 MOA .......................................................................................................................... 3-9
Live Oak MOA........................................................................................................................ 3-11
VR-1065 .................................................................................................................................. 3-12
VR-1066 .................................................................................................................................. 3-13
Baseline Noise Contours for Moody AFB............................................................................... 3-20
Air Quality Control Regions in Georgia, Florida, and Alabama ............................................. 3-27
Sensitive Biological and Cultural Resources at Moody AFB.................................................. 3-49
Wood Stork and Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath and in the Vicinity of Moody 1 MOA.... 3-55
Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath and in the Vicinity of Moody 2 North and South MOAs .. 3-56
Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath and in the Vicinity of Moody 3 MOA............................... 3-57
Wood Stork and Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath and in the Vicinity of Live Oak MOA ... 3-58
Wood Stork and Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath and in the Vicinity of VR-1065.............. 3-59
Wood Stork and Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath and in the Vicinity of VR-1066.............. 3-60
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of Moody AFB.................................................................. 3-79
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of Moody 1 MOA .................................................. 3-82
Land Use underneath Moody 2 North and South MOAs ........................................................ 3-83
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of Moody 2 North and South MOAs ..................... 3-84
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of Moody 3 MOA .................................................. 3-86
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of Live Oak MOA.................................................. 3-87
Land Use underneath VR-1065 – Western Section ................................................................. 3-88
Land Use underneath VR-1065 – Eastern Section .................................................................. 3-89
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of VR-1065 ............................................................ 3-90
Land Use underneath VR-1066 ............................................................................................... 3-91
Land Use underneath VR-1066 ............................................................................................... 3-92
Land Use underneath VR-1066 ............................................................................................... 3-93
Land Use underneath VR-1066 ............................................................................................... 3-94
Land Use underneath VR-1066 ............................................................................................... 3-95
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of VR-1066 ........................................................... 3-96
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the Southwest Georgia Regional Airport,
Albany, Georgia....................................................................................................................... 3-98
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the Valdosta Regional Airport, Georgia ....................... 3-99
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the Tallahassee Regional Airport, Florida .................. 3-100
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the Lake City Municipal Airport, Florida.................. 3-101
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the Gainesville Regional Airport, Florida .................. 3-102
Transportation Plan at Moody AFB ...................................................................................... 3-108
Projected Noise Contours for Moody AFB ............................................................................... 4-6
Cumulative Effects: Manpower Authorizations and Primary Aircraft Inventory..................... 5-8
Table of Contents
v
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
LIST OF TABLES
Number
ES-1
2.1-1
2.1-2
2.1-3
2.1-4
2.1-5
2.1-6
2.1-7
2.1-8
3.2-1
3.2-2
3.2-3
3.2-4
3.2-5
3.2-6
3.2-7
3.2-8
3.2-9
3.3-1
3.3-2
3.3-3
3.3-4
3.3-5
3.3-6
3.3-7
3.3-8
3.3-9
3.3-10
3.3-11
3.3-12
3.3-13
3.5-1
3.8-1
3.8-2
3.9-1
3.10-1
3.10-2
3.10-3
3.10-4
3.10-5
3.10-6
3.10-7
vi
Page
Potential Impacts of the Proposed Action or No-Action Alternative......................................ES-2
Current, Baseline, and Proposed Aircraft Inventory at Moody AFB........................................ 2-4
Current, Baseline, and Proposed Annual Aircraft Sorties......................................................... 2-5
Current, Baseline, and Proposed Annual Airfield Operations at Moody AFB ......................... 2-5
Current, Baseline, and Proposed Annual Sortie-Operations within Affected Airspace............ 2-7
Flight Profiles within Affected Airspace .................................................................................. 2-7
Proposed Maximum Annual Usage of Transition Training Airfields by T-6A Aircraft........... 2-8
Changes in Personnel Authorizations at Moody AFB .............................................................. 2-8
Proposed Construction and Renovation Projects ...................................................................... 2-9
SELs (dB) for Aircraft Based at Moody AFB ........................................................................ 3-19
Noise Contour Acreage in the Vicinity of Moody AFB ......................................................... 3-19
Baseline Noise Levels in Affected Airspace........................................................................... 3-21
SELs for Dominant Aircraft Operating at the Proposed Transition Training Airports........... 3-21
Baseline SELs for Dominant Aircraft and Cumulative DNLs for All Aircraft at
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport...................................................................................... 3-22
Baseline SELs for Dominant Aircraft and Cumulative DNLs for All Aircraft at
Valdosta Regional Airport ...................................................................................................... 3-22
Baseline SELs for Dominant Aircraft and Cumulative DNLs for All Aircraft at
Tallahassee Regional Airport.................................................................................................. 3-23
Baseline SELs for Dominant Aircraft and Cumulative DNLs for All Aircraft at
Lake City Municipal Airport .................................................................................................. 3-23
Baseline SELs for Dominant Aircraft and Cumulative DNLs for All Aircraft at
Gainesville Regional Airport .................................................................................................. 3-23
National and State (Georgia and Florida) Ambient Air Quality Standards ............................ 3-28
Baseline Emissions from Stationary Sources at Moody AFB ................................................ 3-29
Baseline AGE Emissions at Moody AFB ............................................................................... 3-29
Baseline Emissions from Personal Vehicle Use at Moody AFB ............................................ 3-30
Baseline Emissions from Vehicle Operations at Moody AFB................................................ 3-30
Baseline Emissions from Airfield Operations at Moody AFB ............................................... 3-30
Baseline Airspace Emissions .................................................................................................. 3-31
Baseline Airspace Emissions by AQCR ................................................................................. 3-31
Representative Baseline Ambient Air Quality for Southwest Georgia Regional Airport....... 3-32
Representative Baseline Ambient Air Quality for Valdosta Regional Airport ....................... 3-32
Representative Baseline Ambient Air Quality for Tallahassee Regional Airport .................. 3-32
Representative Baseline Ambient Air Quality for Lake City Municipal Airport ................... 3-33
Representative Baseline Ambient Air Quality for Gainesville Regional Airport ................... 3-33
Baseline Hazardous Waste Generation at Moody AFB.......................................................... 3-40
Sensitive Wildlife Species Known to Occur at Moody AFB.................................................. 3-51
Sensitive Wildlife Species Potentially Occurring in Counties under Affected Airspace........ 3-52
Inventory of Potentially Historic Structures at Moody AFB .................................................. 3-64
Population Trends within the Moody AFB ROI and State of Georgia ................................... 3-67
Baseline Manpower Summary for Moody AFB ..................................................................... 3-68
Unemployment Rates within the Moody AFB ROI and State of Georgia.............................. 3-68
Per Capita Personal Income and Total Personal Income within the Moody AFB ROI
and State of Georgia................................................................................................................ 3-69
Estimated Baseline School District Characteristics within the Moody AFB ROI .................. 3-70
Revenues for Georgia Public Schools (in thousands) ............................................................. 3-70
Combined Government Funding of Moody AFB ROI Schools.............................................. 3-70
Table of Contents
T-6A Beddown EA
3.11-1
3.11-2
3.11-3
3.11-4
3.11-5
3.11-6
3.12-1
3.13-1
4.1-1
4.1-2
4.1-3.
4.1-4
4.1-5
4.2-1
4.2-2
4.2-3
4.2-4
4.2-5
4.2-6
4.2-7
4.2-8
4.3-1
4.3-2
4.3-3
4.3-4
4.3-5
4.3-6
4.3-7
4.3-8
4.3-9
4.3-10
4.3-11
4.3-12
4.3-13
4.3-14
4.3-15
4.3-16
4.5-1
4.5-2
4.10-1
4.10-2
4.10-3
4.10-4
Final
Environmental Justice Data for the Moody AFB ROI (1990) ................................................ 3-74
Number of Children in the Moody AFB ROI (1990) ............................................................. 3-74
Environmental Justice Data for Affected Airspace (1990) ..................................................... 3-74
Number of Children underneath Affected Airspace (1990).................................................... 3-75
Environmental Justice Data for Proposed Transition Training Airport Cities........................ 3-75
Number of Children in Proposed Transition Training Airport Cities ..................................... 3-75
Land Use under Affected Airspace......................................................................................... 3-81
Recreation Areas under Affected Airspace........................................................................... 3-104
Proposed Changes in Annual Aircraft Sorties .......................................................................... 4-2
Proposed Changes in Annual Aircraft Operations at Moody AFB........................................... 4-2
Proposed Changes in Annual MOA Utilization........................................................................ 4-3
Proposed Changes in Annual MTR Utilization ........................................................................ 4-3
Proposed Changes in Airport Operations at the Transition Training Airports ......................... 4-3
Noise Contour Acreage in the Vicinity of Moody AFB ........................................................... 4-5
SELs (dB) for Baseline Aircraft and Proposed T-6A Aircraft at Moody AFB......................... 4-7
Noise Levels in Affected Airspace under the Proposed Action................................................ 4-8
SELs for Dominant Aircraft and T-6A and Cumulative DNLs for Each Runway at
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport........................................................................................ 4-8
SELs for Dominant Aircraft and T-6A and Cumulative DNLs for Each Runway at
Valdosta Regional Airport ........................................................................................................ 4-9
SELs for Dominant Aircraft and T-6A and Cumulative DNLs for Each Runway at
Tallahassee Regional Airport.................................................................................................... 4-9
SELs for Dominant Aircraft and T-6A and Cumulative DNLs for Each Runway at
Lake City Municipal Airport .................................................................................................. 4-10
SELs for Dominant Aircraft and T-6A and Cumulative DNLs for Each Runway at
Gainesville Regional Airport .................................................................................................. 4-10
Estimated Annual Emissions from Stationary Sources at Moody AFB.................................. 4-14
Estimated Annual AGE Emissions at Moody AFB ................................................................ 4-14
Estimated Annual Emissions from Personal Vehicles at Moody AFB................................... 4-15
Estimated Annual Emissions from Facility-Based Vehicle Operations at Moody AFB ........ 4-15
Estimated Changes in Emissions from Proposed Aircraft Operations at Moody AFB........... 4-15
Total Estimated Changes in Emissions at Moody AFB under the Proposed Action .............. 4-16
Estimated Total Emission Concentrations at Moody AFB under the Proposed Action ......... 4-16
Estimated Annual Airspace Emissions ................................................................................... 4-17
Estimated Annual Airspace Emissions by AQCR .................................................................. 4-17
Estimated Aircraft Emission Concentrations in Airspace under the Proposed Action ........... 4-18
Estimated Emissions from Proposed Aircraft Operations at Southwest Georgia Regional
Airport..................................................................................................................................... 4-19
Estimated Emissions from Proposed Aircraft Operations at Valdosta Regional Airport ....... 4-19
Estimated Emissions from Proposed Aircraft Operations at Tallahassee Regional Airport... 4-19
Estimated Emissions from Proposed Aircraft Operations at Lake City Municipal Airport.... 4-20
Estimated Emissions From Proposed Aircraft Operations at Gainesville Regional Airport .. 4-20
Estimated Aircraft Emission Concentrations at the Transition Training Airports
under the Proposed Action...................................................................................................... 4-21
Annual Estimated Amount of Hazardous Wastes Generated by T-6A Aircraft ..................... 4-28
Estimated Annual Hazardous Waste Generated at Moody AFB under the
Proposed Action...................................................................................................................... 4-28
Population Impacts.................................................................................................................. 4-41
Indirect Employment Impacts................................................................................................. 4-41
Earnings Impacts (in millions)................................................................................................ 4-42
Education Impacts................................................................................................................... 4-42
Table of Contents
vii
1.0
PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE
PROPOSED ACTION
1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED
ACTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
This environmental assessment (EA) evaluates the potential environmental impacts of a proposed U.S.
Department of the Air Force (Air Force) force structure action at Moody Air Force Base (AFB), Georgia.
The proposed action would:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Establish Joint Primary Pilot Training (JPPT) and beddown the associated Joint Primary Aircraft
Training System (JPATS) at Moody AFB. This would add a total of 49 T-6A aircraft and 444
manpower authorizations to Moody AFB;
Renovate existing facilities and construct new facilities at Moody AFB to accommodate JPATS
squadron operations, classroom training activities, and maintenance activities for T-6A aircraft;
Conduct parasail training operations at Bemiss Field in conjunction with the JPPT course;
Conduct sortie-operations by T-6A aircraft within the Moody 1 Military Operations Area (MOA),
Moody 3 MOA, Live Oak MOA, Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) area, and along two
military training routes (MTRs): Visual Route 1065 (VR-1065) and VR-1066;
Establish mutual use agreements with five civilian airfields in the vicinity of Moody AFB for the
purposes of T-6A transition training, including the practice of multiple overhead patterns,
emergency landing patterns, and instrument approaches;
Change the airspace utilization of Moody 2 North and South MOAs by T-38 aircraft associated
with the existing Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals (IFF) pilot training program; and
Assign 10 T-38 aircraft as Backup Aircraft Inventory (BAI), increasing the total number of T-38
aircraft at Moody AFB to 67. No operational changes would occur.
This EA has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA); Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations; and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 32-7061,
The Environmental Impact Analysis Process (Air Force 1995c).
1.2 BACKGROUND
1.2.1
Moody AFB
Moody AFB is located in south-central Georgia 10 miles northeast of the City of Valdosta on 11,402
acres of federally owned land in Lowndes and Lanier counties (Figure 1.2-1). The installation consists of
the main base (5,039 acres), Grand Bay Range (5,874 acres), and the Grassy Pond Recreation Area annex
(489 acres) which is located 25 miles southwest of the main base. Moody AFB is currently the home to
the 347th Wing (347 WG), which has four primary groups. The 347th Operations Group is the primary
flying organization, with three tactical fighter squadrons (68th Fighter Squadron [68 FS], 69 FS, and 70
FS) and two Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) Squadrons (41st Rescue Squadron [41 RQS] and 71
RQS). The other three groups are the 347th Logistics Group, 347th Support Group, and 347th Medical
Group, which maintain all other base functions.
1.0 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action
1-1
EMMANUEL
HOUSTON
TN
BLECKLEY
CHANDLER
LAURENS
EFFINGHAM
BULLOCH
NC
MACON
SC
DOOLY
STEWART
MONTGOMERY
DODGE
Georgia
AL
280
MOODY
AFB WEBSTER
EVANS
221
WHEELER
★
16
PULASKI
75
TOMBS
BRYAN
SUMTER
G
Atlantic
Ocean
E
O
R
CRISP
G
I
A
TATTNALL
TELFAIR
WILCOX
LIBERTY
RANDOLPH
Florida
TERRELL
JEFF DAVIS
LEE
BEN HILL
Gulf of
Mexico
APPLING
LONG
TURNER
82
Douglas
IRWIN
Albany
CALHOUN
DOUGHERTY
EARLY
WAYNE
BACON
COFFEE
WORTH
MCINTOSH
TIFT
PIERCE
BERRIEN
BAKER
319
COOK
Waycross
221
Nashville
GLYNN
84
19
MITCHELL
MILLER
BRANTLEY
Moody
Adel AFB
COLQUITT
WARE
Lakeland
LANIER
SEMINOLE
CAMDEN
CHARLETON
CLINCH
84
95
GRADY
DECATUR
Valdosta
THOMAS
441
BROOKS
JACKSON
LOWNDES
ECHOLS
WARE
NASSAU
GADSEN
C
A
L
H
O
U
N
LEON
HAMILTON
MADISON
TALLAHASSEE
JEFFERSON
DUVAL
BAKER
LIBERTY
Jacksonville
10
SUWANNEE
COLUMBIA
WAKULLA
TAYLOR
UNION
LA FAYETTE
CLAY
BRADFORD
FRANKLIN
ALACHUA
GILCHRIST
F
L
O
ST.
JOHNS
R
I
D
A
DIXIE
PUTNAM
Gainesville
FLAGLER
Gulf
of
Mexico
LEVY
Ocala
SEMINOLE
MARION
75
LAKE
CITRUS
SUMTER
LEGEND
State Capitol
441
U.S. Highway
Statute Miles
0
Selected Cities and Towns
27
State Boundary
0
County Boundary
75
Location of Moody AFB, Georgia
1-2
27
Nautical Miles
Interstate Highway
Figure 1.2-1
1.0 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Numerous force structure changes have occurred over the years at Moody AFB. The base’s primary
mission in the 1950s was to meet the requirements of the Air Force Pilot Instrument School and
Instrument Flying School. Mission aircraft were the F-89 Scorpion, F-94 Starfire, and F-86 Sabre. The
Instrument Pilot Instructor School operated at Moody until 1958 when it was moved to Texas. At that
time Moody came under the Air Training Command and was designated the 3550th Pilot Training Wing.
In 1975, the 347th Tactical Fighter Wing (347 TFW) was activated as the host unit at Moody AFB. In that
same year, the 347 TFW began to transition from T-37 and T-38 aircraft to F-4E aircraft. In 1987, the
347 TFW began the conversion from F-4s to the F-16. In 1991, the 347 TFW lost the “Tactical”
designation and became the 347th Fighter Wing (347 FW). In 1994, a decision was made to beddown
HC-130 and A/OA-10 aircraft, making Moody AFB one of three composite wings in the Air Force; at
that time, the 347 FW was redesignated the 347 WG.
A decision was made in 1996 to move two CSAR squadrons of six HH-60 helicopters (41 RQS) and nine
HC-130 air refueling aircraft (71 RQS) from Patrick AFB, Florida, to Moody AFB. This realignment of
geographically separated units reduced manpower requirements, placed the affected units under a single
commander, and improved deployability in support of the Air Combat Command (ACC) mission (Air
Force 1996c).
In September 1998, in accordance with Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) recommendations, the 41
RQS was assigned an additional 6 HH-60 aircraft (bringing the Primary Aircraft Inventory [PAI] to 14
HH-60s) (Air Force 1998a). At the same time, the decision was made to inactivate the 70 FS and relocate
the 24 assigned A/OA-10 aircraft to other locations. This action has been partially fulfilled and will be
complete by 1 October 2000. In addition, a decision was made to establish an IFF pilot training program
with 57 PAI T-38 aircraft (includes 54 Primary Aircraft Authorization [PAA] aircraft and 3 Attrition
Reserve aircraft). This action will begin in fiscal year 2000 (FY00) and be complete by FY01 (Air Force
1998a).
Most recently, the Air Force, in an effort to streamline fighter squadron operations, made a decision to
deactivate the 68 FS and 69 FS and relocate the 36 F-16 PAI aircraft and 1,259 military manpower
authorizations associated with the aircraft to other locations. This action will begin in first quarter of
FY01 (FY01/1) and be complete by FY01/2 (Air Force 1999a).
1.2.2
Joint Primary Pilot Training Course Characteristics
There are two courses in the Air Force in which primary pilot training is conducted: one for both Air
Force and U.S. Department of the Navy (Navy) students and the other solely for Air Force students. Air
Education and Training Command (AETC) bases that conduct training for both Navy and Air Force
students implement the JPPT course. Air Force only training is conducted through the Specialized
Undergraduate Pilot Training (SUPT) course. Both courses are configured the same with the exception of
some Navy elements (e.g., swim test) that are part of the JPPT course. Currently, Vance AFB, Oklahoma
conducts JPPT training; Laughlin AFB, Texas and Columbus AFB, Mississippi conduct SUPT (Air Force
1999e).
The JPPT course is designed to qualify undergraduate pilots for advanced undergraduate pilot training
and to prepare them for future responsibilities as military officers and leaders. To accomplish these
requirements, three areas of instruction are presented: 1) flying training, 2) ground or academic training,
and 3) officer development training.
1.0 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action
1-3
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Flying training teaches the principles and techniques used in operating advanced aircraft. This includes
the actual flying of the aircraft, formation flying, pattern training, in-flight emergency procedures,
navigation, instrument flying, pre-flight preparations, and post-flight inspections. Ground (or academic)
training supplements and reinforces flying training; it includes lessons in weather, aerodynamics, flight
physiology, instruments, navigation, water and land survival, aircraft systems (e.g., communications, fuel,
electrical, and hydraulic), and physical training. Officer training emphasizes leadership skills, officer
qualities, and the understanding of the military pilot as a supervisor and officer (AETC and Chief of
Naval Air Training 1998).
1.3 PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the proposed action is to establish a JPPT program at Moody AFB. The Air Force is
currently experiencing a shortage of pilots due to a higher than expected pilot attrition and separation rate.
To meet this higher than expected loss of Air Force pilots, the Air Force is increasing the number of
student pilots entering the SUPT and JPPT programs. Since existing AETC installations are at maximum
capacity for this pilot training program, other Air Force installations must be considered for pilot training.
1.4 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
A variety of laws, regulations, executive orders (EOs), and other types of requirements apply to federal
actions and form the basis of the analysis presented in this EA. NEPA requires federal agencies to
consider potential environmental consequences of proposed actions and enhance the environment through
well-informed federal decisions. CEQ was established under NEPA to implement and oversee federal
policy in this process. Other related federal level compliance documents include AFI 32-7061 (Air Force
1995c), Endangered Species Act, and EO 11514, Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality.
1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This EA assesses the impacts of the proposed action and the no-action alternative on potentially affected
environmental resource areas. Chapter 1.0 (this chapter) provides background information relevant to the
proposed action and discusses its purpose and need. Chapter 2.0 describes the proposed action and
alternative. Chapter 3.0 describes the baseline conditions (i.e., the conditions against which the potential
impacts of the proposed action or alternative are measured) for each of the resource areas, while Chapter
4.0 describes environmental impacts of the proposed action or alternative on these resources. Chapter 5.0
includes an analysis of potential cumulative impacts associated with the proposed action and other past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable projects; and Chapter 6.0 describes any irreversible or irretrievable
(permanent) commitments of resources. Chapter 7.0 contains references used for the preparation of this
EA, including correspondence. Chapter 8.0 lists persons contacted, and Chapter 9.0 lists the preparers.
Appendices, as listed in the Table of Contents, follow Chapter 9.0.
1-4
1.0 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action
2.0
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED
ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND
ALTERNATIVES
2.1 PROPOSED ACTION
The U.S. Department of the Air Force (Air Force) proposes to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Establish Joint Primary Pilot Training (JPPT) and beddown the associated Joint Primary Aircraft
Training System (JPATS) at Moody Air Force Base (AFB) (Figure 2.1-1). This would add a total
of 49 T-6A aircraft and 444 manpower authorizations to Moody AFB;
Renovate existing facilities and construct new facilities at Moody AFB to accommodate JPATS
squadron operations, classroom training activities, and maintenance activities for T-6A aircraft;
Conduct parasail training operations at Bemiss Field in conjunction with the JPPT course;
Conduct sortie-operations by T-6A aircraft within the Moody 1 Military Operations Area (MOA),
Moody 3 MOA, Live Oak MOA, Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) area, and along two
Military Training Routes (MTRs): Visual Route 1065 (VR-1065) and VR-1066;
Establish mutual use agreements with five civilian airfields in the vicinity of Moody AFB for the
purposes of T-6A transition training, including the practice of multiple overhead patterns,
emergency landing patterns, and instrument approaches;
Change the airspace utilization of Moody 2 North and South (N/S) MOAs by T-38 aircraft
associated with the existing Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals (IFF) pilot training program; and
Assign 10 T-38 aircraft as Backup Aircraft Inventory (BAI), increasing the total number of T-38
aircraft at Moody AFB to 67. No operational changes would occur.
Under the proposed action, the beddown at Moody AFB would begin with the arrival of the first T-6A
aircraft the second quarter of fiscal year 2001 (FY01/2) and would be completed by FY02/1. Proposed
changes in airspace utilization by the T-38s would occur in FY00/3. The proposed changes in airspace
use would not require any changes to the structure of any airspace or range used by Moody AFB aircraft.
As part of the proposed action, building renovations and construction would be necessary to support
JPATS program operations.
Characteristics of T-6A aircraft are described in Section 2.1.1. Proposed aircraft inventory; aircraft
operations; personnel changes; and building renovations, construction, and communications network
modifications are described in sections 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 2.1.4, and 2.1.5, respectively.
2.1.1
Aircraft Characteristics
The need for the JPATS was identified in a 1989 Department of Defense (DoD) Trainer Aircraft Master
Plan because existing aircraft used for primary pilot training by the Air Force and U.S. Department of the
Navy (Navy) were outdated. In 1995, the Secretary of the Air Force announced the selection of the T-6A
Texan II (a modified Beech Mk. II) as the replacement for the Air Force’s T-37B and the Navy’s T-34C
aircraft, which are 36 and 21 years old, respectively. The T-6A is being acquired as the primary trainer
aircraft for the next generation of Air Force and Navy entry-level student pilots. In addition to its primary
mission of training entry-level student pilots, the T-6A will support Air Force Navigator Training and
Undergraduate Naval Flight Officer Training (DoD 1995).
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
2-1
TN
the
l
NC
ew
Georgia
N
AL
Be
SC
MOODY
AFB
★
FL
C
ou
Gulf of
Mexico
n ty
Atlantic
Ocean
Ro
ad
12
125
18L/36R
Main Base
Moody
Air Force
Base
125
Grand
Bay Range
Bemiss
Field
18R/36L
221
LEGEND
Moody Air Force Base Boundary
Base Road
0
4,000
Feet
Moody AFB Base Map
2-2
Figure 2.1-1
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
The T-6A Texan II is a single-engine, stepped
tandem, two-seat primary trainer aircraft. It has a
Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-68 turboprop
powerplant flat rated at 1,100 shaft horsepower.
The aircraft combines very low fuel consumption
with the overall economy of a turboprop. The
T-6A has a maximum cruising speed of 270 knots
indicated air speed (KIAS), a ceiling of 31,000
feet above mean sea level (MSL), and a maximum
range of 900 nautical miles (NM). It has an initial
rate of climb of more than 4,500 feet per minute
and a short field capability, with a takeoff distance
T-6A Texan II
of only 1,775 feet at sea level (Raytheon Aircraft
1997, 1999; Navy 1999). A single-engine turboprop typically requires extensive rudder control to
compensate for engine torque, but most student pilots would graduate to jet aircraft where engine torque
is not a factor. Therefore, a computer-controlled rudder trim aid device (TAD) was developed especially
for the T-6A to reduce the need for constant rudder control (Raytheon Aircraft 1997).
The T-6A will provide improvements over existing Air Force trainer aircraft in several areas, including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2.1.2
a pressurized cockpit,
an advanced avionics package with digital cockpit displays and navigational systems,
a Martin/Baker 0/0 ejection seat that can operate during takeoff and landing operations,
an anti-G (gravity force) restraining system,
single-point refueling,
a side-opening, one-piece canopy resistant to bird strikes at speeds up to 270 KIAS, and
a cockpit large enough to accommodate 95 percent of the eligible pilot pool (Air Force 1995a).
Aircraft Inventory
Numerous force structure changes and aircraft realignments are already approved for Moody AFB and
will be implemented over the next several years. These changes would result in year-to-year fluctuations
in the aircraft inventory at the base. As part of the proposed action analyzed in this environmental
assessment (EA), Moody AFB would gain 49 T-6A aircraft, with the first aircraft arriving in FY01/2.
Realignments previously analyzed under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) include a
drawdown of A/OA-10 aircraft and deactivation of the 70th Fighter Squadron (70 FS) (which has been
partially completed), an addition of 6 HH-60s (completed FY99/2), an addition of 57 T-38s, and a
drawdown of 36 F-16 aircraft and deactivation of the 68 FS and 69 FS (to be completed FY01/2) (Air
Force 1998a, 1999a).
To best present the context of the proposed action, this section describes current conditions as well as the
baseline conditions against which potential impacts of the proposed action are measured (Table 2.1-1).
“Current” conditions (FY99/4) represent the aircraft, personnel, operations, and other factors that exist at
Moody AFB at the time the proposed action was presented to the public (August 1999) and reflects the
partial implementation of force structure actions at the installation. Baseline conditions (FY01/2)
represent the status of the base upon full implementation of the already approved realignments (i.e.,
drawdown of A/OA-10s and F-16s and addition of HH-60s and T-38s). In addition, the baseline
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
2-3
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
condition also reflects the no-action alternative, since all actions except for the T-6A beddown have
already been analyzed under NEPA.
Table 2.1-1. Current, Baseline, and Proposed Aircraft Inventory at Moody AFB
Aircraft
A/OA-10
HC-130
HH-60
F-16
T-38
T-6A
Total
Current Conditions
(FY99/4)
12
9
14
36
0
0
71
Baseline/No-Action Alternative
(FY01/2)
0
9
14
0
57
0
80
Proposed Action
(FY02/1)
0
9
14
0
67a
49b
139
Notes: aIncludes 54 PAI, 10 BAI, and 3 Attrition Reserve.
b
Includes 38 PAI, 2 BAI, and 9 Attrition Reserve.
Source: Air Force 1999a, b, t.
2.1.3
Proposed Aircraft Operations
Throughout this EA, three terms are used to describe aircraft operations: sortie, airfield operation, and
sortie-operation. Each has a distinct meaning and commonly applies to a specific set of aircraft activities
in particular airspace areas.
•
A sortie consists of a single military aircraft flight from initial takeoff through final landing.
•
An airfield operation represents the single movement or individual portion of a flight in the base
airfield airspace environment, such as one departure or one arrival. An aircraft practicing
successive approaches within the airfield environment (i.e., closed patterns) accounts for at least
two operations – one approach, one departure.
•
A sortie-operation is defined as the use of one airspace unit (e.g., a MOA or MTR) by one aircraft.
Sortie-operations apply to flight activities outside the airfield airspace environment. Each time a
single aircraft conducting a sortie flies in a different airspace unit, one sortie-operation is counted
for that unit.
As an example, on a typical training mission an aircraft makes an initial takeoff (one airfield operation)
and flies to a MOA (one sortie-operation at the MOA) to practice flight maneuvers. The aircraft proceeds
to an MTR to fly a low-level route (one sortie-operation at the MTR) and then returns to the airfield and
practices two approaches (two closed patterns within the airfield environment [four airfield operations])
before landing (one airfield operation). This mission generates one sortie, six airfield operations, and two
sortie-operations.
2.1.3.1
AIRCRAFT SORTIES
Current, baseline, and proposed annual sorties for Moody AFB aircraft are shown in Table 2.1-2. In
FY01/2, under baseline conditions, the F-16s and remaining A/OA-10s would be relocated from Moody
AFB, resulting in a reduction of approximately 15,000 sorties. However, the addition of the previously
approved T-38s adds 17,784 sorties to baseline conditions, resulting in an increase in sorties of 15 percent
over current conditions (Air Force 1998a). Under the proposed action, annual aircraft sorties would
increase by 20,350 sorties over baseline conditions. This would be about a 92 percent increase compared
2-4
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
to baseline conditions (i.e., no Moody AFB F-16 sorties) or an increase of 121 percent over current
conditions.
AIRFIELD OPERATIONS
2.1.3.2
Current, baseline, and proposed airfield operations at Moody AFB are presented in Table 2.1-3.
Approaches and departures are derived from annual aircraft sorties (i.e., one approach and one departure
per sortie) (Table 2.1-2); closed patterns are estimated based on historical and proposed airfield
operations at Moody AFB.
Table 2.1-2. Current, Baseline, and Proposed Annual Aircraft Sorties
Aircraft
A/OA-10
HC-130
HH-60
F-16
T-38
T-6
Transient
Total
Current Conditions
(FY99/4)
3,900
1,994
1,906
10,920
0
0
500
19,220
Baseline/No-Action Alternative
(FY01/2)
0
1,994
1,906
0
17,784
0
500
22,184
Proposed Action
(FY02/1)
0
1,994
1,906
0
17,784
20,350
500
42,534
Sources: Air Force 1998a; 1999a, b.
Table 2.1-3. Current, Baseline, and Proposed Annual Airfield Operations at Moody AFB
Aircraft
A/OA-10
HC-130
HH-60
F-16
T-38
T-6
Transient
Total
Current Conditions
(FY99/4)
A/D
CP
7,800
0
3,988
1,004
3,812
0
21,840
1,698
0
0
0
0
1,000
6,396
38,440
9,098
Baseline/No-Action Alternative
(FY01/2)
A/D
CP
0
0
3,988
1,004
3,812
0
0
0
35,568
59,792
0
0
1,000
6,396
44,368
67,192
Proposed Action
(FY02/1)
A/D
CP
0
0
3,988
1,004
3,812
0
0
0
35,568
59,792
40,700
244,200
1,000
6,396
85,068
311,392
Notes: A/D = Approaches and Departures
CP = Closed Patterns
Sources: Air Force 1999a, b, h.
The increase in approach and departure numbers reflects similar increases as aircraft sorties. Closed
patterns shift from a current condition of 9,098 to 67,192 under baseline conditions as a result of the
beddown of the T-38. With the beddown of the T-6A under the proposed action, the total number of
airfield operations would increase from 111,560 under baseline conditions to 396,460.
2.1.3.3
AFFECTED AIRSPACE
Under the proposed action, T-6A training operations would be conducted in Moody 1, Moody 3, and Live
Oak MOAs; VR-1065 and VR-1066; and within the LATN area. T-38 training operations would be
conducted in Moody 2 N/S MOAs (Figure 2.1-2). Current, baseline, and proposed annual sortieoperations are summarized in Table 2.1-4. Compared to baseline conditions, sortie-operations would
increase in all airspace units as a result of implementation of the proposed action.
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
2-5
95
26
85
75
LA
R
TN
20
20
G
E
O
R
G
I
COLUMBIA
RY
DA
UN
BO
ATLANTA
34°N
R
S
C
A
O
R
U
O
T
L
H
I
N
A
A
26
A
L
A
B
A
M
A
95
MONTGOMERY
R
16
75
85
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
VR-1066
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Á,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
J,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
Moody 2
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
North MOA
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
1
,,,,,,, Moody
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Moody 2
MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Á
South
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
J
MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
JR
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
ÁJ
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
BO
UN
DA
RY
32°N
Á
Savannah
Moody 3 MOA
LA
TN
Albany
Á
Dothan
Moody AFB
VR-1065
10
LAT
N
95
Valdosta
BOU
NDA
RY
Jacksonville
Á
TALLAHASSEE
10
Lake City
30°N
J
Á
Live Oak
MOA
Atlantic
Gainesville
Ocean
86°W
F
TN
L
O
R
I
D
A
NC
75
SC
AL
Georgia
Á Orlando
MOODY
AFB
★
Gulf
of
Mexico
4
95
28°N
Tampa
FL
275
St. Petersburg
Gulf of
Mexico
Á
Á
75
Atlantic
Ocean
80°W
82°W
84°W
LEGEND
Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) Boundary
,,,,,,
Operations Area (MOA)
,,,,,, Military
Military Training Route
J
Statute Miles
0
0
Proposed Transition Training Airport
55
Nautical Miles
Affected Airspace
2-6
55
Figure 2.1-2
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
This is primarily due to the nature of student pilot training and the associated large number of training
operations required by students in order to gain full knowledge of the aircraft and flying procedures.
Table 2.1-4. Current, Baseline, and Proposed Annual Sortie-Operations within Affected
Airspace
Airspace Unit
Current
Conditions
(FY99/4)
Baseline/No-Action Alternative
(FY01/2)
Proposed Action
(FY02/1)
Net
Increase
3,865
2,685
2,117
611
34
295
2,965
5,834
957
2,520
8,336
77
692
1,715
19,729
1,077
4,956
9,512
1,323
1,938
1,981
13,895
120*
2,436
1,176
1,246
1,246
266
Moody 1 MOA
Moody 2 N/S MOAs
Moody 3 MOA
Live Oak MOA
VR-1065
VR-1066
LATN
Note: *The increase in sortie-operations within Moody 2 N/S MOAs is from T-38s only.
Sources: Air Force 1998a, 1999b.
Although the largest increase in sortie-operations would occur in Moody 1 MOA (an increase of 13,895
sortie-operations per year), all of these sortie-operations would be conducted at altitudes greater than
8,000 feet MSL (Table 2.1-5). Similarly, all sortie-operations within the Moody 3 and Live Oak MOAs
would also be above 8,000 feet MSL. Under the proposed action, there would be an increase of 120
sortie-operations per year by T-38 aircraft in the Moody 2 N/S MOAs. Detailed current, baseline, and
proposed annual airspace use by all aircraft within all airspace units is shown in Appendix B, Table B-1.
Table 2.1-5. Flight Profiles within Affected Airspace
Altitude (feet)
1,000 – 8,000
MSL
Airspace
Unit
Aircraft
Type
Minutes in
Airspace
Avg %
Power
Avg
KIAS
500 – 1,000
AGL
8,000 +
MSL
Moody 1 MOA
Moody 2 N/S
MOAs
Moody 3 MOA
Live Oak MOA
VR-1065
VR-1066
LATN
T-6A
T-38
40
40
80
90
180
420
0%
90 %
0%
10 %
100 %
0%
T-6A
T-6A
T-6A
T-6A
T-6A
40
40
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
180
180
210
210
210
0%
0%
80 %
80 %
80 %
0%
0%
20 %
20 %
20 %
100 %
100 %
0%
0%
0%
Source: Air Force 1999b
2.1.3.4
TRANSITION TRAINING AIRPORTS
In order for student pilots to practice airfield operations in a variety of airport environments under the
proposed action, five civilian airports would be used for transition training: Albany and Valdosta,
Georgia; and Lake City, Gainesville, and Tallahassee, Florida (see Figure 2.1-2). For the transition
training airports, the following selection criteria were used to assess the potential for a particular airport to
meet the purpose and need for the training requirements:
•
•
•
runway must be a minimum of 5,000 feet long, 75 feet wide, and paved;
the airport must have a published DoD approach into the airport; and
an Air Traffic Control tower must oversee operations at the airport.
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
2-7
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
These airports would be used for multiple overhead patterns, emergency landing patterns, and instrument
approaches. The proposed requirement would consist of a maximum of 7,500 annual sorties conducted at
as many of the five transition fields as possible. For example, conducting 3,500 sorties at Valdosta, 1,000
at Gainesville, 1,000 at Tallahassee, and 2,000 at Albany would accomplish the requirement of 7,500
annual sorties. Use of these airports is dependent on factors such as weather, maintenance, and airfield
saturation by other air traffic. Therefore, the total number of sorties at each airport would vary but would
not exceed the proposed maximum annual use (Table 2.1-6). On average, transition training would
involve each aircraft conducting four airfield operations consisting of a combination of instrument
approaches, overhead patterns, straight-in patterns, and/or emergency landing patterns.
Table 2.1-6. Proposed Maximum Annual Usage of Transition Training Airfields by
T-6A Aircraft
Airport
Proposed Maximum
Annual Sorties
Proposed Maximum
Annual Airfield Operations
3,750
3,750
1,500
1,500
2,500
15,000
15,000
6,000
6,000
10,000
Albany, Georgia
Valdosta, Georgia
Lake City, Florida
Gainesville, Florida
Tallahassee, Florida
Source: Air Force 1999b.
2.1.4
Personnel Changes
Moody AFB currently supports 4,589 full-time military and civilian personnel. Current conditions
include all personnel associated with the F-16s and half of the A/OA-10 personnel (i.e., 281, since only
half of the aircraft and associated personnel have relocated from Moody AFB as of August 1999); no
T-38 personnel are included. Baseline conditions include all 408 personnel associated with the T-38s and
the addition of 15 personnel due to the arrival of a detachment of the 820th Security Forces Group (820
SFG) in FY00/1 (Air Force 1999c). Baseline conditions do not include the remaining 281 personnel
associated with the A/OA-10 drawdown, the 1,259 F-16 personnel (i.e., the A/OA-10 and F-16
realignments are complete), and the 136 manpower authorizations as the result of the relocation of the 71st
Air Control Squadron (71 ACS) in FY00/4 (Air Force 1999d). As part of the proposed action, 444
manpower authorizations would be reassigned to Moody AFB (Table 2.1-7). The proposed action
consists of baseline conditions plus personnel at Moody AFB associated with the proposed T-6A
beddown. The proposed action would result in a 13 percent increase in personnel compared to baseline
conditions.
Table 2.1-7. Changes in Personnel Authorizations at Moody AFB
Personnel
Current
Conditions
(FY99/4)
Baseline/No-Action
Alternative
(FY01/2)
Proposed Action
(FY02/1)
Officer
Enlisted
Civilian
Contractor
Total
484
3,710
395
0
4,589
435
2,331
396
144
3,306
721*
2,390
399
240
3,750
Note: *Includes approximately 200 student pilot authorizations.
Sources: Air Force 1999a, b.
2-8
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
T-6A Beddown EA
2.1.5
2.1.5.1
Final
Construction and Renovation Projects
BUILDING RENOVATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION
The proposed action would require the modification and construction of several facilities in order to meet
the operational and maintenance requirements for the T-6A aircraft and JPPT course beddown. Many of
the proposed facility renovations and/or construction projects would be collocated with other facilities
already approved for the T-38 and IFF beddown (Air Force 1998a) and would require only minor
additional renovations or construction to accommodate JPPT program specific requirements. Table 2.1-8
describes the proposed construction and renovation program, and Figure 2.1-3 shows the location of the
proposed projects at Moody AFB.
Table 2.1-8. Proposed Construction and Renovation Projects
Project*
1. Renovate Bldg. 707 and Bldg. 709
2. Renovate Bldg. 796a
3. Restripe parking apron and install aircraft tiedowns
4. Construct addition to Bldg. 785b
5. Install Barrier Arresting Kit 15 (BAK-15)
6. Renovate Bldg. 753
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Renovate Bldg. 778
Renovate Squadron Operations, Bldg. 704c
Construct addition to Bldg. 717
Renovate Bldg. 711
Renovate Bldg. 771
a. Construct addition to Bldg. 770
b. Renovate Bldg. 770
Construct Parachute Swing Landing Trainer
adjacent to Bldg. 770
Construct Runway Control Structure (RCS)
between runways and 1,500 ft. from ends
Relocation of selected targets at Bemiss Field
Trenching and laying of fiber-optic cable
between Bldgs. 590, 701,772,773,774, 775,
and 780.
Proposed Use
IFF Headquarters Squadron Operations
and Academics/Classroom/Computer
Assisted Instruction Lab
IFF Contractor Operated and Managed
Base Supply (COMBS) Warehouse
T-6A aircraft parking
Electrical/Battery shop
Aircraft arresting cables at ends of runway
Survival equipment inspection shop
(parachute packing, etc.)
JPATS COMBS
AETC Squadron Operations
Corrosion control
Flight simulator facility
IFF Operations Group office space
Physiological Training Unit
Parachute training facility
RCS
Area
13,258 ft2
3,000 ft2
50,142 yd2
50 ft2
1 kit
4,424 ft2
12,330 ft2
10,800 ft2
1,200 ft2
9,560 ft2
8,000 ft2
1,500 ft2
11,100 ft2
One 30foot tower
Two RCSs
Parasail Training Area
Combat Information Transport System
(CITS)
NA
NA
Notes: NA = Not Applicable.
*The locations of these projects are shown in Figure 2.1-3.
a
Additional renovation; 1,000 ft2 of renovation has been covered under a previous EA (Air Force 1998a).
b
Additional construction; 950 ft2 of construction has been covered under a previous EA (Air Force 1998a).
c
Additional renovation; 11,200 ft2 of renovation has been covered under a previous EA (Air Force 1998a).
Source: Air Force 1999g.
2.1.5.2
USE OF BEMISS FIELD FOR PARASAIL TRAINING
Although the majority of the JPPT course would consist of flight training in T-6A aircraft in southern
Georgia and northern Florida and classroom instruction at Moody AFB, one training activity would occur
in the Bemiss Field area: parasail training (i.e., practicing parachute landings). Site preparation of
Bemiss Field prior to training would involve the moving of some existing targets (i.e., tanks) to other
locations on the field; no clearing, ground disturbance, or other site preparation would be conducted.
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
2-9
125
18L/36R
5
Main Base
14
6
1
590
8
701
9
11
10
13
2
4
780
12
125
775
773
7
3
772
774
KEY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Renovate Buildings 707 and 709
Renovate Building 796
Restripe Parking Apron and Install Aircraft Tie-Downs
Construct Addition to Building 785
Install BAK-15
Renovate Building 753
Renovate Building 778
Renovate Squadron Operations Building 704
Construct Addition to Building 717
Renovate Building 711
Renovate Building 771
Renovate and Construct Addition to Building 770
Construct Parachute Swing Landing Trainer Adjacent
to Building 770
14 Construct RCS between Runways and 1,500 feet from ends
15 Move Selected Targets at Bemiss Field (not shown)
Note: Project numbers correspond to those presented in Table 2.1-8.
TN
NC
SC
AL
Georgia
MOODY
AFB
★
14
5
FL
Gulf of
Mexico
Atlantic
Ocean
18R/36L
LEGEND
Moody Air Force Base Boundary
Runways/Taxiways/Aircraft Aprons
16
See Key above
0
Location of Proposed Construction and Renovation Projects at Moody AFB
2-10
1,600
Feet
Base Road
Figure 2.1-3
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Parasail training would involve towing a parasail-equipped student behind a long-bed pickup truck until
the student reaches an appropriate altitude. The truck would slowly accelerate and would not exceed 2530 miles per hour. The tow rope would then be released and the student would practice parachute landing
skills. Air Force safety requirements call for a 2,500-foot long travel distance; however, less than half
that distance is usually needed. Vehicle travel direction and exact location would depend on specific
wind direction; all traffic, however, would be confined to the former Bemiss Field airstrip, with the
majority of use in the vicinity of the intersection of the two airstrips.
On a typical training day, 20 students would be bussed to Bemiss Field at 6 A.M. Following a safety
briefing and exercise warm-up period, the first launch/training event would occur at approximately 7 A.M.
Depending on weather conditions (e.g., winds within training limit of 15 mph), training would continue
until 12 P.M. If weather conditions were not favorable, training would be postponed and resumed the next
day. Student training would be conducted for 2-4 half-days every 3 weeks, plus some additional crew
proficiency or instructor training for 2 half-days every 3 months. This results in approximately 64 halfday parasail training events per year. Currently, Air Force parasail training averages approximately 8
launches per hour resulting in a total of 40 launches per half-day. As part of the JPPT course, each
student is required to receive three parasail launches. Since a class size is approximately 20 students, it
takes 2-4 half-days to complete 20 students in parasail training, allowing for weather delays.
The only vehicle that would be used on Bemiss Field during parasail training events would be the parasail
truck towing the student. The bus used to transport the students to and from Bemiss Field would remain
on established roads. Instructors would take two vehicles, but these would remain parked during all
training exercises and drip pans would be used while vehicles are parked in the field training area.
2.1.5.3
COMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE
Under the proposed action, a fiber-optic communication system would be installed at Moody AFB to
augment the current system. This system would provide connectivity between 13 different facilities to
support the Training Integrated Management System (TIMS). It would also provide network capability
for the numerous unique information systems required by the JPPT program. The Combat Information
Transport System (CITS) is an Air Force program to upgrade infrastructure throughout the Air Force.
CITS would be implemented in three phases. Phase one (which has already been implemented) provides
the necessary connectivity to buildings 101, 109, 622, 704, 709, and 711. Phases two and three would
require connectivity to buildings 590, 701, 772, 773, 774, 775, and 780 (see Figure 2.1-3). This would
require trenching along the periphery of the aircraft apron to replace the existing copper cable with fiber
optics.
2.2 ALTERNATIVES
In compliance with NEPA and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 32-7061, The Environmental Impact Analysis
Process (Air Force 1995c), which implements the NEPA process, the Air Force must consider reasonable
alternatives to the proposed action. Only those alternatives determined reasonable relative to their ability
to fulfill the need for the action warrant detailed analysis.
A number of alternative sites were evaluated to determine the most feasible location for the T-6A aircraft
beddown and associated JPPT course. Selection criteria used to evaluate potential beddown locations
included: 1) the use of an existing Air Education and Training Command (AETC) base with the T-37 and
Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training (SUPT) program; 2) a non-AETC base with an operational pilot
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
2-11
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
training program (to maximize infrastructure sharing); 3) available ramp space for parking 49 T-6A
aircraft; and 4) close access to training airspace.
2.2.1
2.2.1.1
Alternatives Carried Forward
NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the no-action alternative the beddown of the JPATS program and associated aircraft would not
occur at Moody AFB. All airfield, airspace, and range use would be the same as baseline conditions. No
change in personnel authorizations would occur, and no building renovations or construction would be
necessary.
2.2.2
Alternatives Considered but Not Carried Forward
Eight AETC flight training installations were considered potential alternative locations to beddown the
JPPT program: Columbus and Keesler AFBs, Mississippi; Vance and Altus AFBs, Oklahoma; Laughlin,
Sheppard, and Randolph AFBs, Texas; and Little Rock AFB, Arkansas. Four of these installations
(Laughlin, Vance, Columbus, and Sheppard AFBs) are currently proposed as JPATS beddown sites with
the replacement of the current T-37 and associated facilities. Randolph AFB has been approved for the
beddown of the JPATS program, and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was signed in June
1997 (Air Force 1997a). Decisions made as a result of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of
1990 resulted in the closure of two other AETC bases: Williams and Reese AFBs, Texas. The pilot
production requirements of these two bases were redistributed to Columbus, Laughlin, and Vance AFBs.
This consolidation, in addition to the change from a single track Undergraduate Pilot Training program to
the two track SUPT and requirements to increase pilot production, has resulted in these installations
reaching their maximum capacity for pilot training. Capacity is determined by the physical and spatial
capacity of the airfield to accommodate aircraft landings and takeoffs, the amount of available airspace in
which to conduct training, and the physical capability to park the aircraft. Since these bases are at
capacity and are already proposed to receive the JPPT program to replace their existing T-37 program,
they were eliminated from further consideration (Air Force 1999f).
Keesler AFB supports training for the C-21, a small personnel transport jet. This installation has only one
runway and no room for expansion of the existing runway or addition of another runway. Since the
existing runway is inadequate and a second runway would be required to accommodate the JPATS
training program, Keesler AFB was eliminated from further consideration (Air Force 1999f).
Altus and Little Rock AFBs currently train pilots in flying “heavy” aircraft such as transport aircraft (e.g.,
C-5) and air refueling aircraft (e.g., KC-135R). Airspeeds, approach and departure patterns, and air
turbulence associated with heavy aircraft at Altus and Little Rock AFBs are not compatible with the flight
profiles of a primary training aircraft such as the T-6A. In addition, available airspace in the vicinity of
the installations is fully utilized. Therefore, due to safety concerns regarding the mixing of the flight
profiles of two different types of aircraft (i.e., large, transport aircraft with smaller trainer aircraft) and
scheduling conflicts in available airspace, Altus and Little Rock AFBs were eliminated from further
consideration as potential JPPT program beddown sites (Air Force 1999f).
2-12
2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives
3.0
AFFECTED
ENVIRONMENT
3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
This section presents information on environmental conditions for resources potentially affected by the
proposed action and alternative described in Chapter 2.0. Under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), the analysis of environmental conditions should address only those areas and environmental
resources with the potential to be affected by the proposed action or alternatives; locations and resources
with no potential to be affected need not be analyzed. The environment includes all areas and lands that
might be affected, as well as the socioeconomic, cultural, and natural resources they contain or support.
For the purposes of analysis in this environmental assessment (EA), baseline conditions represent the
status of Moody Air Force Base (AFB) in the second quarter of fiscal year 2001 (FY01/2) upon full
implementation of the drawdown of A/OA-10s (the 70th Fighter Squadron [70 FS]) and F-16s (68 FS and
69 FS) and the beddown of HH-60s and T-38s; these actions have been previously analyzed under NEPA.
In the environmental impact analysis process (EIAP), the resources analyzed are identified and the
expected geographic scope of potential impacts, known as the region of influence (ROI), is defined. For
the beddown of the T-6A aircraft and its associated ground based training facilities at Moody AFB, the
U.S. Department of the Air Force (Air Force) analyzed environmental resources within three ROIs: 1)
Moody AFB and the area in the immediate vicinity of the base; 2) the military training airspace proposed
for use by T-6A and T-38 aircrews from Moody AFB; and 3) the areas at and surrounding each of the five
proposed transition training airports. Since no ground related activities would occur at the proposed
transition training airports (i.e., there would be no ground disturbance and T-6A aircraft would not land),
the following environmental resource areas were not analyzed for each of the transition training airports:
hazardous materials and hazardous wastes, earth resources, water resources, and transportation.
3.1 AIRSPACE
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has overall responsibility for managing airspace through a
system of flight rules and regulations, airspace management actions, and Air Traffic Control (ATC)
procedures. The FAA accomplishes this through close coordination with state aviation and airport
planners, military airspace managers, and other entities to determine how airspace can be used most
effectively to serve all interests. All military and civilian aircraft are subject to Federal Aviation
Regulations (FARs).
The FAA has designated four types of airspace above the U.S.: controlled, uncontrolled, special use, and
other. The categories and types of airspace are dictated by the complexity or density of aircraft
movements, the nature of the operations conducted within the airspace, the level of safety required, and
national and public interest in the airspace. The ROI for the proposed action and alternatives includes
controlled airspace (Moody AFB and the five proposed transition training airports), special use airspace
used for military aircrew training (Military Operations Areas [MOAs] and Military Training Routes
[MTRs]), and other (e.g., controlled and uncontrolled airspace represented by the Moody Low Altitude
Tactical Navigation [LATN] area).
Controlled Airspace
Controlled airspace is a generic term that encompasses the different classifications of airspace (Class A,
B, C, D, and E) and defines dimensions within which ATC service is provided for instrument flight rules
(IFR) and visual flight rules (VFR) conditions. VFR air traffic flies below 18,000 feet above mean sea
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
3-1
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
level (MSL) using visual references such as towns, highways, and railroads as a means of navigation.
VFR aircraft may also follow federal airways at altitudes not used by aircraft on instrument flight. VFR
conditions rely heavily on “see and avoid” procedures that require pilots to be visually alert for and
maintain safe distances from other aircraft, populated areas, obstacles, or clouds. Most other air traffic
(including air passenger carriers, business aircraft, and military aircraft) operate under IFR conditions that
require pilots to be trained and appropriately certified in instrument navigational procedures. The
respective procedures established under VFR and IFR for airspace use and flight operations help
segregate aircraft operating under each set of rules. Military pilots are trained for and use both VFR and
IFR conditions. Refer to Figure B-1 in Appendix B for a depiction of the various classes of airspace
discussed below.
Class A Airspace. Class A airspace includes all flight levels or operating altitudes, including that airspace
overlying the waters within 12 nautical miles (NM) of the coast of the 48 contiguous states, from 18,000
to 60,000 feet MSL. Formerly referred to as a Positive Control Area, Class A airspace is dominated by
commercial aircraft using routes between 18,000 and 45,000 feet MSL.
Class B Airspace. Class B airspace typically comprises that airspace from the surface to 10,000 feet MSL
surrounding the nation’s busiest airports. The configuration of each Class B airspace area is individually
tailored and consists of a surface area with an additional two or more layers; it is designed to contain all
published instrument procedures once an aircraft enters the airspace. An ATC clearance is required for
all aircraft to operate in the area, and all aircraft that are so cleared receive separation services within the
airspace. Class B airspace is typically associated with major metropolitan airports such as the AtlantaHartsfield International Airport, Georgia.
Class C Airspace. Airspace designated as Class C can generally be described as controlled airspace that
extends from the surface up to 4,000 feet above ground level (AGL). Class C airspace is designated and
implemented to provide additional control into and out of primary airports that occasionally experience a
large number of aircraft operations. All aircraft operating within Class C airspace are required to
maintain two-way radio communications with local ATC entities. Class C airspace is associated with city
airports such as Tallahassee Regional Airport, Florida.
Class D Airspace. Class D airspace is the area within 5 NM from an operating ATC-controlled airport,
extending from the surface to 2,500 feet AGL or higher. All aircraft operating within Class D airspace
must be in two-way radio communications with the ATC facility. The airspace in the immediate vicinity
of Valdosta Regional Airport and Moody AFB is Class D airspace.
Class E Airspace. Class E airspace is controlled airspace that is not designated as Class A, B, C, or D. It
includes designated federal airways consisting of low-altitude V or “Victor” routes. Federal airways have
a width of 4 statute miles on either side of the airway centerline and can occur between altitudes of 700
feet AGL and 18,000 feet MSL. These airways frequently intersect approach and departure paths from
both military and civilian airfields. The majority of Class E airspace is located where more stringent
airspace controls has not been established.
Uncontrolled Airspace
Class G Airspace. Uncontrolled airspace, Class G, is not subject to the restrictions that apply to
controlled airspace. Limits of uncontrolled airspace typically extend from the ground surface to 700 feet
AGL but can extend above these altitudes to as high as 14,500 feet MSL if no other types of controlled
3-2
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
airspace have been designated by the FAA. ATC does not have the authority to exercise control over
aircraft operations within uncontrolled airspace. Primary users of uncontrolled airspace are general
aviation aircraft operating in accordance with VFR.
Special Use Airspace
Special use airspace consists of airspace within which specific activities must be confined, or where
limitations are imposed on aircraft not participating in those activities. With the exception of Controlled
Firing Areas, special use airspace is depicted on sectional aeronautical charts. These charts include hours
of operation, altitudes, and the agency controlling the airspace. All special use airspace descriptions are
contained in FAA Order 7400.8E and published in the Department of Defense (DoD) Flight Information
Publication AP/1A: Special Use Airspace North and South America and AP/1B: Area Planning Military
Training Routes North and South America.
MOAs. MOAs are non-regulatory special use airspace areas with defined vertical and lateral limits.
MOAs are designed to increase safety for IFR and VFR traffic. When a MOA is active (in use), all IFR
traffic is re-routed around the area. Non-participating VFR traffic may enter the active MOA but see and
avoid procedures must be used.
MTRs. MTRs are flight corridors dedicated to low-level flight operations (below 10,000 feet MSL) that
can exceed 250 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS) (except for Slow Routes [SRs], see below). An MTR is
composed of a centerline surrounded by a defined corridor width. MTRs are designed to minimize
disturbances to people, property, and other potentially sensitive land areas. Descriptions of MTRs are
published with special operating instructions to avoid airports and noise-sensitive areas. Individual
military installations also assist in controlling and scheduling MTRs to avoid sensitive areas. There are
three types of MTRs: IFR or Instrument Routes (IRs); VFR or Visual Routes (VRs); and Slow-Speed
Low-Altitude Routes or SRs. IRs are mutually developed by DoD and FAA to provide for military
operational and training requirements that cannot be met under the aircraft speed restrictions in FAR
91.117. IRs require that IFR flight plans and procedures be followed. VRs require IFR flight plans to the
entry point and after the exit point of the VR, and there must be VFR conditions throughout the VR. SRs
cover those MTRs that are used for military flight operations slower than 250 KIAS; they require VFR
conditions for the entire SR.
Refueling Tracks/Anchors (ARs). ARs are published tracks where fuel transfer between military aircraft
can take place.
Other
LATN Area. Airspace associated with low-speed and low-altitude training conducted by military aircrews
is commonly identified as a LATN area. LATN areas generally have an altitude structure between 100
and 1,500 feet AGL and an airspeed restriction not to exceed 250 KIAS. A LATN area covers large areas
of uncontrolled airspace and facilitates operational flexibility (e.g., flight patterns are not confined to
narrow flight corridors and the direction of flight is not restricted). The purpose of LATN areas is to
conduct random VFR low-altitude navigation training in an area that is defined by local military
operations. Military aircraft are required to follow all existing FARs while flying within a LATN area.
Other nonparticipating civil and military aircraft may fly within a designated LATN area but are required
to maintain visual separation from other aircraft in visual meteorological conditions. Military and civilian
pilots are responsible to “see and avoid” each other while operating in a LATN area. Since the FAA does
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
3-3
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
not consider a LATN area special use airspace, formal airspace designation is not required. For the same
reason, LATN areas are not included on FAA charts or publications.
3.1.1
3.1.1.1
Moody AFB and Vicinity
MOODY AFB AIRSPACE ENVIRONMENT
Valdosta Radar Approach Control (RAPCON) at Moody AFB provides ATC service to Moody AFB and
10 other airports in the region. RAPCON is responsible for directing military aircraft passing from one
special use airspace to another (including R-3008 [Grand Bay Range], Moody 1 MOA, and Moody 2
North and South [N/S] MOAs) within their controlling area, and directing civil aircraft around or beneath
these special use airspace units.
Moody AFB has two active runways: runway (RWY) 18L/36R is 9,300 feet in length, and RWY
18R/36L is 8,000 feet in length (refer to Figure 2.1-1). Both runways are north-south oriented and
support VFR and IFR operations.
Airspace associated with Moody AFB serves both civil and military aircraft operating to and from the
installation or passing through the immediate area. Controlled airspace surrounds Moody AFB in order to
support local airfield operations. In addition to the Valdosta RAPCON, the Moody AFB ATC tower
provides assistance for aircraft within the Moody AFB Class D airspace. Class D airspace is located
immediately around the installation and consists of a cylinder with a radius of 5 NM centered on the
airfield up to 2,700 feet AGL (refer to Figure B-7 in Appendix B).
3.1.1.2
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL OPERATIONS
Policies and procedures for flight operations, ATC, and airfield operations are established in Moody AFB
Instruction 11-250: Aircrew Operational Procedures/Air Traffic Control/Airfield Operations. All
aircraft using Moody AFB are subject to the provisions of these regulations and instructions.
Airfield operations controlled by ATC include approaches and departures, as well as aircraft passing
through the controlled airspace. An airfield operation is different than a sortie in that one sortie consists
of one aircraft flying an entire mission, from take-off to final landing. For example, an ATC count of one
sortie may comprise two or more airfield operations, consisting of a departure, arrival, or several
operations if the sortie returns and practices additional approaches in a closed pattern mode. All “tower”
operations are limited to aircraft entering the Moody AFB Class D airspace; RAPCON operations include
IFR activity at Moody AFB and other airfields in the local area.
Airfield operations will fluctuate on a daily basis. To account for this fluctuation, daily operations are
based on an average busy day using 260 operational flying days per year. For Moody AFB, this equates
to approximately 429 airfield operations per day based on a baseline level of 111,560 annual airfield
operations (refer to Table 2.1-3). HC-130 and T-38 fixed-wing aircraft and HH-60 helicopters account
for most of the baseline airfield operations. Transient aircraft from other bases that enter Moody AFB
airspace include military aircraft (fixed-wing and rotary-wing) and civilian aircraft.
3.1.2
Airspace
The locations of the airspace units that encompass the ROI are shown in Figure 3.1-1. Table B-1 in
Appendix B details current, baseline, and proposed annual airspace use (day and night) by aircraft type
3-4
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
and airspace. Table B-2 provides detailed flight profiles (i.e., time in airspace, speed, power, and altitude)
for all aircraft using the airspace associated with the proposed action.
3.1.2.1
MOAS
Moody 1 MOA. The Moody 1 MOA covers approximately 6,164 square NM in south-central Georgia and
a small portion of north Florida (Figure 3.1-2). Moody 1 MOA encompasses the airspace from 8,000 feet
MSL up to but not including 18,000 feet MSL (refer to Figure B-2 in Appendix B). Normal hours of use
are 7:00 A.M. – 11:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Occasionally the airspace is used during Saturday
and Sunday when posted in a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM). The Jacksonville Air Route Traffic Control
Center (ARTCC) is the controlling agency, with the Valdosta RAPCON at Moody AFB the using agency.
There are 13 public and 9 private airports that are located beneath or adjacent to the MOA and are
controlled by Moody ATC to provide separation from military airspace. Nine MTRs underlie Moody 1
MOA airspace: IR-019, IR-016, VR-094, VR-095, VR-1001, VR-1002, VR-1003, VR-1004, and
VR-1066. In addition, four federal airways or Victor Routes (V) pass through portions of the Moody 1
MOA: V5, V537, V578, and V579 (refer to Figure B-3 and Figure B-4 in Appendix B).
Moody 2 N/S MOAs. Moody 2 N/S MOAs, covering approximately 318 and 405 square NM,
respectively, are located beneath the southeastern corner of Moody 1 MOA (Figure 3.1-3). Moody 2 N
MOA encompasses the airspace from 500 feet AGL up to but not including 8,000 feet MSL. Moody 2 S
MOA encompasses the airspace from 100 feet AGL up to but not including 8,000 feet MSL (refer to
Figure B-2 in Appendix B). Normal hours of use for both Moody 2 N/S MOAs are 7:00 A.M. – 11:00
P.M., Monday through Friday. Occasionally the airspace is used during Saturday and Sunday when
posted in a NOTAM. The Jacksonville ARTCC is the controlling agency, with the Valdosta RAPCON at
Moody AFB the using agency. No federal airways pass through this airspace. Five MTRs (IR-16,
VR-1002, VR-1003, VR-1004, and VR-1066) transit Moody 2 N/S MOAs and require coordination with
Moody AFB (refer to Figure B-3 in Appendix B). Homerville Public Airport is the only airport beneath
the Moody 2 N MOA. There are no public or private airports directly beneath Moody 2 S MOA.
Moody 3 MOA. Covering approximately 1,800 square NM, Moody 3 MOA is located in southwest
Georgia with the northwest edge just inside Alabama (Figure 3.1-4). Moody 3 MOA encompasses the
airspace from 8,000 feet MSL up to but not including 18,000 MSL (refer to Figure B-5 in Appendix B).
Normal hours of use are 7:00 A.M. – 11:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Occasionally the airspace is
used during Saturday and Sunday when posted in a NOTAM. The Jacksonville ARTCC is the controlling
agency, and the 347th Wing (347 WG) at Moody AFB is the scheduling and using agency. There are
eight MTRs beneath Moody 3 MOA: IR-017, IR-019, IR-021, IR-057, IR-057, VR-1001, VR-1005, and
VR-1017 (refer to Figure B-3 in Appendix B); there are no federal airways in this airspace. Five airports
(three private and two public) are located beneath the airspace. Aircraft at these airports are directed
underneath, above, or around the MOA when it is in use.
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
3-5
95
26
85
75
LA
R
TN
20
20
G
E
O
R
G
I
COLUMBIA
RY
DA
UN
BO
ATLANTA
34°N
R
S
C
A
O
R
U
O
T
L
H
I
N
A
A
26
A
L
A
B
A
M
A
95
MONTGOMERY
R
16
75
85
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
VR-1066
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Á,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
J,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
Moody 2
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
North MOA
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
1
,,,,,,, Moody
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Moody 2
MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Á
South
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
J
MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
JR
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
ÁJ
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
BO
UN
DA
RY
32°N
Á
Savannah
Moody 3 MOA
LA
TN
Albany
Á
Dothan
Moody AFB
VR-1065
10
LAT
N
95
Valdosta
BOU
NDA
RY
Jacksonville
Á
TALLAHASSEE
10
Lake City
30°N
J
Á
Live Oak
MOA
Atlantic
Gainesville
Ocean
86°W
F
TN
L
O
R
I
D
A
NC
75
SC
AL
Georgia
Á Orlando
MOODY
AFB
★
Gulf
of
Mexico
4
95
28°N
Tampa
FL
275
St. Petersburg
Gulf of
Mexico
Á
Á
75
Atlantic
Ocean
80°W
82°W
84°W
LEGEND
Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) Boundary
,,,,,,
Operations Area (MOA)
,,,,,, Military
Military Training Route
J
Statute Miles
0
0
Proposed Transition Training Airport
55
Nautical Miles
Affected Airspace
3-6
55
Figure 3.1-1
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
Fl
i nt
280
41
Moody 1 MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
8,000' –
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
17,999' MSL
17,999' MSL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
8,000' MSL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Moody 2
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
N/S MOAs
500'/100'
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
AGL –
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
7,999' MSL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Ground Surface
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Litt
le
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
DOOLY
Vienna
DOOLY
Pineview
129
SUMTER
75
WHEELER
McRae
280
Scotland
23
WILCOX
441
TELFAIR
319
TELFAIR
Pitts
De Soto
280
Hazlehurst
WILCOX
A
341
L.
A
D
Rebecca
RI
Jacksonville
129
JEFF DAVIS
O
FL
Arabi
Warwick
221
Lumber City
Rochelle
CRISP
WHEELER
341
Rhine
Abbeville
Cordele
Leslie
Helena
Chauncey
Milan
er
R iv
280
DODGE
EO
G
IA
RG
BEN HILL
LEE
23
319
Leesburg
Ashburn
TURNER
Denton
Fitzgerald
Sycamore
19
41
Albany
Broxton
75
221
Ocilla
441
WORTH
BACON
COFFEE
Ambrose
82
DOUGHERTY
IRWIN
Sylvester
Putney
Sumner
Alma
TIFT
Poulan
Ty Ty
Nicholls
Douglas
Tifton
Enigma
Phillipsburg
82
Baconton
319
Alapaha
Willacoochee
Omega
19
Doerun
MITCHELL
ATKINSON
Sale City
Sale City
Camilla
Pearson
BERRIEN
Norman Park
COLQUITT
82
129
Lenox
221
Funston
Ellenton
Riverside
Moultrie
WARE
Nashville
Sparks
Adel
Pelham
COOK
75
Meigs
Pavo
Morven
319
Barwick
84
Cairo
THOMAS
Thomasville
er
he
cooc e R i v
thla
Wi
Coolidge
Du Pont
Moody AFB
CLINCH
125
221
41
84
Naylor
Valdosta
221
84
84
Quitman
LOWNDES
G
F
LEON
319
Tallahassee
129
O
R
G
I
A
L
O
R
I
D
A
ECHOLS
441
Lake
Park
E
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
Homerville
Hahira
BROOKS
Boston
Argyle
129 Lakeland
Cecil
Ochlocknee
GRADY
Ray City
84
441
LANIER
41
Berlin
Fargo
41
19
JEFFERSON
Monticello
221
Jennings
MADISON
HAMILTON
75
,,,,,, Moody 1 MOA
,,,,,,
,,,,,, State Boundary
,,
LEGEND
Statute Miles
0
County Boundary
12
0
Cities and Towns
12
Nautical Miles
Wetlands
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
COLUMBIA
Jasper
Moody 1 MOA
Figure 3.1-2
3-7
82
520
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
MOODY 2 NORTH MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
MOODY 2 SOUTH MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Willacoochee 135
441
221
158
31
17,999' MSL
Pearson
129
520
ATKINSON
BERRIEN
76
Moody 1 MOA
23
8,000' –
17,999' MSL
7,999' MSL
A
L.
D
RI
Ground Surface
84
441
89
Ray City
37
Lakeland
129
37
11
IA
RG
11
82
EO
G
125
WARE
A
135
Moody 2
N/S MOAs
500'/100'
AGL –
7,999' MSL
O
FL
31
129
4
82
221
Nashville
1
38
Argyle
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
WARE
Homerville
LANIER
187
Du Pont
Moody AFB
CLINCH
31
221
125
Valdosta
11
Naylor
38
129
84
187
LOWNDES
94
31
89
441
ECHOLS
41
7
Lake
Park
94
11
129
75
G E O R G
I A
F L O R I D
A
Jennings
41
100
25
129
,,,,,, Moody 2 MOA
,,,,,,
,,,,,, State Boundary
,,
County Boundary
Cities and Towns
Wetlands
Fargo
94
94
441
HAMILTON
47
441
3-8
Okefenokee Swamp
COLUMBIA
LEGEND
Statute Miles
0
6
0
6
Nautical Miles
Moody 2 North and South MOAs
Figure 3.1-3
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Walter F. George
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Lake
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Riv
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
LEGEND
,,,,,, Moody 3 MOA
,,,,,,
,,,,,, State Boundary
0
30
520
82
39
118
45
QUITMAN
520
17,999' MSL
27
131
1
BARBOUR
TERRELL
Dawson
1
431
82
520
Cuthbert
RANDOLPH
332
8,000' MSL
Shellman
Sasser
LEE
A
LA
95
BA
A
O
FL
M
Ground Surface
520
A
EO
G
D
RI
Coleman
IA
RG
CLAY
82
Moody 3 MOA
8,000' – 17,999' MSL
Fort Gaines
37
Abbeville
10
Albany
37
Edison
HENRY
Bluffton
DOUGHERTY
Morgan
CALHOUN
62
Leary
39
Arlington
95
62
27
91
1
Haleburg
37
Blakely
134
EARLY
Newton
62
Damascus
BAKER
Columbia
27
Chattah
Webb
52
1
37
91
o och
ee
MITCHELL
95
Ashford
97
Colquitt
370
91
er
84
Gordon
12
65
MILLER
91
97
HOUSTON
Jakin
311
G
262
E O
A L A B
A M A
F
I
O
R
38
JACKSON
27
Brinson
2
2
112
97
1
84
91
D A
Malone
53
Iron City
A
7
L
Donalsonville
I
R G
53
GRADY
SEMINOLE
Bascom
309
262
DECATUR
Bainbridge
Statute Miles
7
County Boundary
0
Cities and Towns
Moody 3 MOA
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
7
Nautical Miles
Figure 3.1-4
3-9
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Live Oak MOA. Live Oak MOA is located over north-central Florida and covers an area of approximately
1,300 square NM (Figure 3.1-5). Live Oak MOA encompasses the airspace from 8,000 feet MSL up to
but not including 18,000 feet MSL (refer to Figure B-6 in Appendix B). Normal hours of use are 7:00
A.M. – 10:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Occasionally, the airspace is used on weekends when posted
in a NOTAM. The Jacksonville ARTCC is the controlling agency, and the 347 WG at Moody AFB is the
scheduling and using agency. Two federal airways (V537 and V579) pass through Live Oak MOA, and
eight MTRs underlie the airspace: IR-016, IR-019, IR-032, IR-033, VR-1001, VR-1002, VR-1003, and
VR-1006 (refer to Figure B-3 in Appendix B). Fifteen small private and public airports are located
underneath or immediately adjacent to the MOA. Military aircraft not using the airspace and civilian
aircraft are generally directed beneath, over, or around the MOA by Jacksonville ARTCC to avoid
conflicts with military training activities.
3.1.2.2
MTRS
VR-1065. This route contains VFR traffic that extends from a floor of 100 feet AGL to a ceiling of 1,500
feet AGL. VR-1065 begins midway between Valdosta and Tallahassee, Florida (Figure 3.1-6). The route
then proceeds west, just northeast of Eglin AFB where it turns south and ends just east of Eglin AFB.
There are eight small public airports near this MTR, three of which have instrument approach capabilities.
Several overflight restrictions apply to areas beneath this airspace (refer to Appendix B, Airspace, VR1065).
VR-1066. VR-1066 contains VFR aircraft traffic extending from 100 feet to 1,500 feet AGL. The MTR
is immediately adjacent to Moody 2 South MOA, and the route begins at the MOA boundary (Figure
3.1-7). There are six small public airports near this MTR, five of which have instrument approach
capabilities. There are also special operating procedures that apply, which include limiting aircraft from
flying below 1,500 feet AGL for portions of the route (refer to Appendix B, Airspace, VR-1066).
3.1.2.3
LOW ALTITUDE TACTICAL NAVIGATION (LATN) AREA
Moody LATN Area. The Moody LATN area encompasses more than 85,000 square NM and covers
portions of southeastern Alabama, northern Florida, most of the State of Georgia, and a small area of
southern South Carolina (see Figure 3.1-1). The LATN area is designed so that there are few or no
multiple flight patterns over any one location due to LATN area operations. Currently, HH-60s and
HC-130s from Moody AFB use the LATN area and fly at altitudes from 100 feet AGL to 1,500 feet MSL
(HH-60s) and 300 feet AGL to 1,500 feet MSL (HC-130s).
3-10
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
53
75
145
MADISON
6
Jasper
6
10
90
10
53
100
ee R
Lee
441
41
ive
r
25
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
Ri
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
a
S u wS
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ee
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
e Riv
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ta
S an
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
17,999' MSL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
unwn
aenenee
129
10
ann
R iv er
249
White
Springs
Live Oak
41
Su w
75
100
25
90
10
Lake City
COLUMBIA
SUWANNEE
55
Five
Points
10
51
53
221
47
135
vReri
ver
90
10
HAMILTON
lac
With o o c h
6
Madison
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
25
41
129
Perry
441
249
27
20
27
Mayo
247
75
20
LAFAYETTE
47
98
27A
19
Branford
55
20
27
51
TAYLOR
18
Fort
White
F
361
er
a nne e Riv
349
8,000' MSL
27
er
Bell
GILCHRIST
Su w
L.
A
51
20
49
IA
RG
EO
G
A
D
RI
O
FL
DIXIE
Gulf of Mexico
Ground Surface
358
349
55
Live Oak MOA
8,000' – 17,999' MSL
,,,,,, Live Oak MOA
,,,,,,
,,,,,, County Boundary
47
129
Newberry
19
27A
98
Cross City
26
Trenton
LEGEND
Statute Miles
0
7
Cities and Towns
Wetlands
Live Oak MOA
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
0
7
Nautical Miles
Figure 3.1-5
3-11
3-12
29
DOUGHERTY
Daleville
Kinsey
SC
AL
Damascus
EARLY
Columbia
BAKER
Newton
Doerun
VR-1065
Sale City
Kinston
Horn Hill
Baconton
Georgia
19
27
Dothan
Clayhatchee
NC
Blakely
R GIA
84
County Line
Headland
TN
Arlington
GEO
Pinckard
Enterprise
84
Andalusia
HENRY
Newton
BAMA
Opp
Babbie
DALE
ALA
Newville
231
Sanford
CALHOUN
Haleburg
New
Brockton
Heath
WORTH
Leary
431
Ozark
COFFEE
Elba
331
MOODY
★AFB
Camilla
Ashford
Colquitt
Coffee Springs
COVINGTON
Malvern
Hartford
331
HOUSTON
GENEVA
Samson
Slocomb
Eunola
MITCHELL
MILLER
84
A L A B
Paxton
Florida
Gulf of
Mexico
Meigs
231
F
L
O
R
A M A
I
Geneva
Cottonwood
Madrid
Black
Moultrie
Donalsonville
Iron City
Coolidge
Esto
D A
Noma
Laurel Hill
Graceville
Brinson
SEMINOLE
Malone
Campbellton
Ochlocknee
Bainbridge
Whigham
DECATUR
Greenwood
Jacob City
Cairo
Climax
Thomasville
Cottondale
90
Westville
Chipley
10
Boston
Marianna
10
Attapulgus
G E O R G
I A
F L O R I
D A
Rive
Sneads
Chattahoochee
Vernon
90
Wausau
331
Valparaiso
Havana
Gretna
WALTON
Altha
Monticello
10
e
GADSDEN
Choc
90
Midway
10
Blountstown
e
RRiivv
Bristol
CALHOUN
98
231
Lynn Haven
Ap
al
Laguna Beach
Hiland Park
Panama City Beach
Panama City
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
Gulf of Mexico
65
Wewahitchka
JEFFERSON
,,,,,,
Centerline and Corridor
,,,,,, VR-1065
State Boundary
319
,,,
,,,
St. Marks
319
98
TAYLOR
98
Gulf of Mexico
Statute Miles
0
County Boundary
15
0
Cities and Towns
VR-1065
19
Woodville
Sopchoppy
LEGEND
27
e
WAKULLA
GULF
98
LEON
LIBERTY
c kon
e
BAY
Oc
hl o
ach
icol a
River
Miramar
Beach
19
319
Greensboro
Ebro
Destin
27
Quincy
WASHINGTON
Freeport
84
Grand
Ridge
Alford
Ponce de Leon
OKALOOSA
Pavo
THOMAS
Barwick
84
Bonifay
Caryville
De Funiak
Springs
319
GRADY
Bascom
JACKSON
HOLMES
98
Riverside
Pelham
Jakin
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Lake Seminole
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
r
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Tallahassee
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
atc h e
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
taw
err
Florala
Lockhart
90
Atlantic
COLQUITT
Ocean
Gordon
Avon
Taylor
Funston
15
Nautical Miles
Figure 3.1-6
23
441
LAURENS
Mount
Vernon
Glenwood
TN
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Georgia
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
★
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Atlantic
er
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Ocean
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Oc
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Alta
Gulf of
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ma
ha
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Mexico
Rive
r
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Wi
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ll
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Ma
ry s
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
r
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Riv e r
S
Okefenokee Swamp
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
n
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
an
w
u
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
341
319
Eastman
280
Lyons
WHEELER
NC
Collins
Higgston
Manassas
Alamo
221
TOOMBS
Chauncey
DODGE
MONTGOMERY
Helena
Scotland
441
280
23
BRYAN
EVANS
VR-1066
Alston
Uvalda
MOODY
AFB
301
TATTNALL
25
341
319
TELFAIR
FL
e
lge
mu
Lumber City
LIBERTY
Glennville
er
Riv
WILCOX
Pembroke
AL
Reidsville
R iv
McRae
Milan
Rhine
Oc o n e e
280
SC
Daisy
Hagan
280
1
Hinesville
Hazlehurst
Gumbranch
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
JEFF DAVIS
129
Graham
341
Jacksonville
APPLING
Walthourville
Baxley
23
BEN HILL
1
319
Denton
84
Surrency
Ludowici
Fitzgerald
Odum
Broxton
Ocilla
441
LONG
221
Jesup
COFFEE
Ambrose
BACON
Alma
301
IRWIN
WAYNE
Douglas
Nicholls
25
Screven
341
Enigma
PIERCE
82
Alapaha
Patterson
Willacoochee
84
1
ee River
ooch
ac
BERRIEN
129
23
Blackshear
ATKINSON
Pearson
82
GLYNN
Nahunta
221
82
Nashville
Waycross
Hoboken
BRANTLEY
LANIER
Ray City
84
441
WARE
129 Lakeland
COOK
Argyle
Homerville
17
301
Du Pont
Moody AFB
Woodbine
CLINCH
125
1
221
41
95
CAMDEN
84
Naylor
23
CHARLTON
Homeland
75
Valdosta
Folkston
Kingsland
ECHOLS
R I DA
,,,,,, VR-1066 Centerline and Corridor
,,,,,,
,,,,,, State Boundary
S
441
GIA
75
FLO
Fargo
LOWNDES
GEOR
Lake
Park
t.
129
ee R
ive
41
Hilliard
17
23
301
95
LEGEND
Statute Miles
0
12
County Boundary
0
Cities and Towns
12
Nautical Miles
Wetlands
VR-1066
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
Figure 3.1-7
3-13
T-6A Beddown EA
3.1.3
Final
Transition Training Airports
Transition training airports have been selected based on the minimum criteria outlined in Section 2.1.3.4:
minimum paved runway size of 5,000 feet long and 75 feet wide, published DoD approach, and an ATC
tower overseeing operations at the airport.
Similar to military airfield operations, civilian airfield operations typically fluctuate on a daily basis. To
account for this fluctuation, daily operations are based on an average busy day using 365 operational
flying days per year.
3.1.3.1
SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL AIRPORT
The Southwest Georgia Regional Airport (SGRA) is located in southwest Georgia, approximately 5 miles
southwest of Albany, Georgia. The airfield has two crossing runways: RWY 34-16 (5,200 x 150 feet)
and RWY 22-04 (6,601 x 150 feet). There is a Global Positioning System (GPS) and an Instrument
Landing System (ILS) approach for RWY 04 and a Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) and GPS approach
to RWY 16. The tower is open from 7:00 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. SGRA is Class D airspace from 10:00 P.M.
until 6:45 A.M. and Class E airspace from 6:45 A.M. until 10:00 P.M. Class E airspace begins at Pecan
very high frequency (VHF) omnidirectional range station/tactical air navigation (VORTAC) and
encompasses approaches into the airfield (refer to Figure B-8 in Appendix B). The airport falls under the
Jacksonville ARTCC. There are approximately 115 operations per day at the airport consisting of
commercial aircraft, general aviation aircraft (a small flying school), and military aircraft operations.
Military aircraft include Army helicopters, C-12s, C-9s, C-130s, and C-141s. Commercial and general
aviation aircraft include B-727s, B-757s, MU-300s, and CL-601s. Current aircraft traffic is well within
tower and airport capacity, and there are no airspace conflicts or congestion (SGRA 1999).
3.1.3.2
VALDOSTA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Valdosta Regional Airport is located approximately 4 miles southwest of downtown Valdosta, Georgia.
The airfield has three crossing runways: RWY 35-17 (6,302 x 150 feet), RWY 22-04 (5,598 x 100 feet),
and RWY 31-13 (3,636 x 75 feet). There are two published approaches to RWY 35: an ILS and a GPS.
Airspace surrounding Valdosta Regional Airport is Class D (refer to Figure B-7 in Appendix B). There
are scheduled commercial commuter airline services, general aviation, and military flight activities into
and out of the airfield. The current aircraft traffic of approximately 155 operations per day is well within
tower and airport capacity and there are no airspace conflicts or congestion (Valdosta Regional Airport
1999).
3.1.3.3
TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
The Tallahassee Regional Airport is located approximately 5 miles from downtown Tallahassee, Florida.
The airfield has two crossing runways: RWY 27-9 (8,000 x 150 feet) and RWY 36-18 (6,076 x 150 feet).
There are two published approaches to RWY 36 (Hi ILS and TACAN). There is an ILS to RWY 27 that
is not monitored when the tower is closed. Tower operations are from 6:00 A.M. until 11:00 P.M. The
airport is located in Class C airspace (refer to Figure B-9 in Appendix B). The airport handles 330
airfield operations per day and serves a variety of users including five commercial airlines, commuter and
charter aircraft, air cargo operations, corporate aviation, general light aircraft flight training, military, and
agency aircraft (e.g., Florida Forest Service and Florida Bureau of Aviation). Military aircraft include
A-10s, E-8As, F-15Es, F-16s, T-37s, T-38s, and UH-60s. Commercial and general aviation aircraft
include B-737s, MD-82s, MU-300s, CL-601s, HS-748s, and DH-6s. Tallahassee Approach Control
provides aircraft separation until the aircraft depart the local airspace and are under the control of
3-14
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Jacksonville ARTCC. Current aircraft traffic is well within tower and airport capacity, and there are no
airspace conflicts or congestion (Tallahassee Regional Airport 1999).
3.1.3.4
LAKE CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
The Lake City Municipal Airport is located approximately 7 miles east of Lake City, Florida. It has two
active crossing runways: RWY 10-28 (8,003 feet x 150 feet) and RWY 5-23 (4,001 feet x 75 feet).
Military aircraft are restricted to RWY 10-28. There is one VHF omnidirectional range station/distance
measuring equipment (VOR/DME) or GPS-A approach to the airfield and a Non-directional Radio
Beacon located at the field (refer to Figure B-10 in Appendix B). Currently the VOR/DME is unusable
due to obstruction by trees. Lake City is in Class E airspace. The airport has general aviation aircraft, a
flight school, and an aircraft maintenance depot for B-727 and DC-9 type aircraft (TIMCO, Inc); there is
no scheduled commercial passenger air service into Lake City Municipal Airport. Current aircraft traffic,
approximately 36 airfield operations a day, is well within tower and airport capacity and there are no
airspace conflicts or congestion (Lake City Municipal Airport 1999). These operations include military,
commercial, and general aviation aircraft. Military aircraft include C-9As and P-3As. Commercial and
general aviation aircraft include L-1011s, B-727s, B-737s, and DC9-10s. The tower is maintained by
TIMCO, Inc., and is operational from 8:00 A.M. until 6:00 P.M. and at other times as requested for aircraft
maintenance tests (TIMCO, Inc. 1999).
3.1.3.5
GAINESVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
The Gainesville Regional Airport is located 12 miles northeast of Gainesville, Florida. It has two
crossing runways: RWY 28-10 (7,501 feet x 150 feet) and RWY 24-6 (4,158 feet x 100 feet). There are
four published approaches into the airport: RWY 28 has an ILS and Non-directional Radio Beacon
approach, RWY 10 has a Back Course Localizer approach, and there is also a VOR/GPS approach to a
circling approach to both runways. The airport is in Class D airspace with a corridor of Class E airspace
from the surface for published approaches into the airfield (refer to Figure B-11 in Appendix B). There
are 222 airfield operations per day. Current aircraft traffic is well within tower and airport capacity, and
there are no airspace conflicts or congestion. The airport has commercial commuter jet services, general
aviation, military aircraft operations, and light aircraft flight training. Military aircraft include C-9As,
P-3As, and UH-60s. Commercial and general aviation aircraft include DC-9-3s, Lear Jets, CL-601s, and
HS-748s. Gainesville Regional Airport is in Class D airspace; Gainesville Tower coordinates flight
arrivals and departures with Jacksonville ARTCC. The tower is open from 6:45 A.M. until 10:30 P.M.
(Gainesville Regional Airport 1999a).
3.0 Affected Environment: Airspace
3-15
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.2 NOISE
Noise is defined as any sound that is undesirable because it interferes with communication, is intense
enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise annoying (Federal Interagency Committee on Noise [FICON]
1992). Human response to noise can vary according to the type and characteristic of the noise source, the
distance between the noise source and the receptor, the sensitivity of the receptor, and the time of day.
Due to the wide variations in sound levels, sound levels are measured using a logarithmic scale expressed
in decibels (dB). Thus, a 10-dB increase in noise corresponds to a 100-percent increase in the perceived
sound. Under most conditions, a 5-dB change is necessary for noise increase to be noticeable (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] 1972). Sound measurement is further refined by using an
A-weighted decibel (dBA) scale that emphasizes the range of sound frequencies that are most audible to
humans (between 1,000 and 8,000 cycles per second). All sound levels analyzed in this environmental
assessment (EA) are A-weighted; the term dB implies dBA unless otherwise noted (refer to Appendix A,
Aircraft Noise Analysis for a more detailed discussion of noise).
In this EA, a single-event noise such as an overflight is described by the sound exposure level (SEL),
airfield noise levels are measured in day-night average sound level (DNL), and airspace noise levels are
calculated using the onset rate adjusted monthly day-night sound level (DNLmr). Both DNL and DNLmr
noise metrics incorporate a “penalty” for nighttime noise events occurring between the hours of 10:00
P.M. and 7:00 A.M. to account for increased annoyance. A more thorough description of these noise
metrics is provided below.
The region of influence (ROI) for the proposed action includes Moody Air Force Base (AFB) and
vicinity; Moody 1, Moody 2 North and South (N/S), Moody 3, and Live Oak Military Operations Areas
(MOAs); Visual Route (VR) 1065 and VR-1066; and five regional airports located in Albany and
Valdosta, Georgia; and Tallahassee, Gainesville, and Lake City, Florida.
Sound Exposure Level
The SEL measurement is used to describe such noise events as overflying aircraft. The SEL is a
measurement that takes into account both the intensity and the duration of a noise event. The SEL
measurement is comprised of the following components: 1) a period of time when an aircraft is
approaching a receptor and noise levels are increasing; 2) the instant when the aircraft is closest to the
receptor and the maximum noise level is experienced; and 3) the period of time when the aircraft moves
away from the receptor resulting in decreased noise levels.
Noise generated by aircraft is often assessed in terms of a single event, which is incorporated into SEL
measurements. The frequency, magnitude, and duration of single noise events vary according to aircraft
type, engine type, power setting, and airspeed. Therefore, individual aircraft noise data are collected for
various types of aircraft and engines at different power settings at various phases of flight. These values
form the basis for the individual-event noise descriptors at any location and are adjusted to the location by
applying appropriate corrections for temperature, humidity, altitude, and variations from standard aircraft
operating profiles and power settings.
3.0 Affected Environment: Noise
3-17
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Day-Night Average Sound Levels
The DNL is the energy-averaged sound level measured over a 24-hour period, with a 10-dB penalty
assigned to noise events occurring between 10:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. DNL values are obtained by
averaging SEL values for a given 24-hour period. DNL is the preferred noise metric of the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), EPA, and
Department of Defense (DoD).
Studies of community annoyance in response to numerous types of environmental noise show that DNL
correlates well with impact assessments; there is a consistent relationship between DNL and the level of
annoyance. The “Schultz Curve” (refer to Figure A-2 in Appendix A) shows the relationship between
DNL noise levels and the percentage of population predicted to be highly annoyed. This same
relationship can be applied to DNLmr noise levels since DNLmr is always equal to or greater than DNL for
a given condition.
Most people are exposed to sound levels of 50 to 55 dB (DNL) or higher on a daily basis. Research has
indicated that about 87 percent of the population is not highly annoyed by outdoor sound levels below 65
dB (DNL) (FICON 1992). Therefore, the 65 dB (DNL) noise contour is typically used to help determine
compatibility of military operations with local land use. For comparison purposes, normal conversation
(at a distance of 3 feet) is approximately 60 dB, loud speech is approximately 70 dB, and the sound of a
train approaching a subway platform is approximately 90 dB. At approximately 120 dB, sound can be
intense enough to induce pain, while at 130 dB, immediate and permanent hearing damage can result
(National Park Service 1997).
Onset Rate Adjusted Day-Night Average Sound Level
Aircraft operations within MOAs and along military training routes (MTRs; e.g., VRs) generate noise
levels different from community noise environments. Aircraft operations at airfields tend to be
continuous or patterned, while sortie-operations in airspace are sporadic. Noise from military overflights
also differs from community noise because of the low-altitude and high-speed characteristics of military
aircraft maneuvers. Military jet aircraft can exhibit a rate of increase in sound level (onset rate) of up to
150 dB per second. The DNL metric is adjusted to account for the surprise, or startle, effect of the onset
rate of aircraft noise with an adjustment of up to 11 dB added to the normal SEL. Because of the sporadic
occurrences of aircraft overflights in MOAs and along MTRs, the number of daily operations is
determined from the calendar month with the highest number of operations in each area. This onset rate
adjusted monthly day-night average sound level is designated as the DNLmr.
Noise Modeling
Noise contributions from aircraft operations and ground engine run-ups at Moody AFB airfield, and the
five transition airports were calculated using the NOISEMAP (NMAP) computer model, the standard
noise estimation methodology used for military airfields. NMAP uses the following data to develop noise
profiles: aircraft types, runway utilization patterns, engine power settings, airspeeds, altitude profiles,
flight track locations, number of operations per flight track, engine run-ups, and time of day.
Noise levels resulting from aircraft operating in the affected MOAs and VRs were calculated with the
Military Operating Area and Range Noise Model (MR_NMAP) (which incorporates NMAP technology).
Calculations of noise levels may yield differing results for adjacent airspace elements, depending on the
3-18
3.0 Affected Environment: Noise
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
type, level, and frequency of training events. Resultant noise levels were based on the number of monthly
sortie-operations, time of day, aircraft altitudes, engine power settings, and airspeed.
3.2.1
Moody AFB and Vicinity
Using the OMEGA Version 11.3 computer model (University of Dayton Research Institute 1999), SEL
values were calculated for various altitudes for baseline aircraft at Moody AFB (Table 3.2-1).
Table 3.2-1. SELs (dB) for Aircraft Based at Moody AFB
Distance
HH-60
T-38
HC-130
500 feet
1,000 feet
2,000 feet
2,500 feet
8,000 feet
KIAS
Power Setting
91
87
81
79
68
140
LFO Lite1
113
107
101
98
83
200
100% RPM
96
91
85
83
72
200
970 CTIT
Notes: SEL values calculated under standard atmospheric conditions. Due to the varying power settings and airspeeds of
aircraft, average power settings and airspeeds presented in this table represent the values used for noise analysis of
aircraft operating in the airfield environment.
1
Power setting not used to calculate SEL values for helicopters; values are based on air speed.
LFO = level flight operation; RPM = revolutions per minute; CTIT = turbine inlet temperature (degrees
centigrade).
Aircraft flying in airfield airspace generally adhere to established flight paths and overfly the same areas
surrounding the airfield on a consistent basis. At Moody AFB, noise from flight operations typically
occurs beneath main approach and departure corridors and in areas immediately adjacent to parking
ramps and aircraft staging areas. As aircraft takeoff and gain altitude, their contribution to the noise
environment drops to levels indistinguishable from existing background noise.
Land use guidelines identified by the Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise (FICUN) are used
to determined compatible levels of noise exposure for various types of land use surrounding airports
(FICUN 1980); 65 to 85+ dB (DNL) noise contours are frequently used to help determine compatibility
of aircraft operations with local land use. These guidelines are included in Table A-1, Appendix A.
Figure 3.2-1 presents the baseline DNL 65 to 85 dB noise contours in 5 dB increments surrounding the
Moody AFB airfield. Table 3.2-2 presents the baseline land acreage exposed to noise levels greater than
65 dB (DNL) based on yearly aircraft operations shown in Table 2.1-3.
Table 3.2-2. Noise Contour Acreage in the Vicinity of Moody AFB
Noise Contour (DNL)
Baseline (acres)
65-70 dB
70-75 dB
75-80 dB
80-85 dB
85+ dB
Total
2,721
1,636
800
397
632
6,186
Source: Air Force 1999a.
3.0 Affected Environment: Noise
3-19
N
ew
Be
the
l
122
65
Barretts
70
l
the
Be
nty R
C ou
125
d
oa
Ne w
85
80
12
75
85
Moody
Air Force
Base
Bemiss
Field
80
Bemiss
75
To Valdosta
65
221
70
125
TN
NC
SC
AL
Georgia
y
em
ad
MOODY
AFB
c
sA
t
★
igh
Kn
Atlantic
Ocean
FL
Gulf of
Mexico
LEGEND
Moody Air Force Base Boundary
65
Baseline Noise Contour and dB Value
Town
0
Baseline Noise Contours for Moody AFB and Vicinity
3-20
5,000
Feet
Base Road
Figure 3.2-1
3.0 Affected Environment: Noise
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Moody AFB has received 25 noise complaints since January 1999 (Air Force 1999a). Of these, 11 were
from Lakeland, 7 were from Valdosta, 2 were from Moultrie, and 1 each were registered from Statenville,
Sylvester, and Engima, Georgia; Madison, Florida; and Franklin, North Carolina. Of these noise
complaints, nine were attributable to A/OA-10s, seven to F-16s, four to HC-130s, two to HH-60s, and
three were classified as “unknown.”
3.2.2
Airspace
Table B-1 and Table B-2 in Appendix B present the average operational parameters for aircraft that
contribute to the noise environment in potentially affected airspace units. Baseline noise levels calculated
for potentially affected airspace are presented in Table 3.2-3.
Table 3.2-3. Baseline Noise Levels in Affected Airspace
Airspace
Annual Sortie-Operations
DNLmr (dB)
5,834
957
2,520
8,336
77
692
<45
48 and 47, respectively
<45
<45
51
61
Moody 1 MOA
Moody 2 N/S MOAs1
Moody 3 MOA
Live Oak MOA
VR-1065
VR-1066
Note: 1North and South MOAs.
Source: Air Force 1999a.
3.2.3
Transition Training Airports
Table 3.2-4 provides SELs at various altitudes for baseline aircraft at the proposed transition training
airports.
Table 3.2-4. SELs for Dominant Aircraft Operating at the Proposed Transition Training
Airports1
Altitude (AGL)
500 feet
1,000 feet
2,000 feet
2,500 feet
KIAS
Power Setting
BAE-HS748
95
90
85
83
200
100% RPM
Shorts
SD3-30
89
84
80
78
200
100% RPM
C-141A
113
107
100
98
200
96% NF
E-8A
111
104
97
94
200
1.84 EPR
Lear-25
116
111
105
102
200
2,600 lbs
Single Engine,
Fixed Pitch
81
76
71
70
200
100% RPM
B-727-1D
116
111
106
104
200
14,000 lbs
DC9-10D
114
109
104
102
200
14,000 lbs
Notes: SEL values calculated under standard atmospheric conditions. Due to the varying power settings and airspeeds of aircraft, average
power settings and airspeeds presented in this table represent the values used for noise analysis of aircraft operating in the airfield
environment.
SEL values for HH-60 = UH-60 helicopter are shown in Table 3.2-1.
RPM = revolutions per minute NF = fan speed; EPR = engine pressure ratio; lbs = pounds.
3.2.3.1
SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Aircraft flying at Southwest Georgia Regional Airport (SGRA) adhere to established flight paths and
overfly the same areas surrounding the airfield on a consistent basis. At SGRA, noise from flight
operations typically occurs beneath main approach and departure corridors and in the immediate vicinity
of the airport. SGRA currently handles approximately 41,975 annual airfield operations, or 115 airfield
operations on an average busy day. Aircraft include B-727’s; Shorts 3-30’s; small, single-engine aircraft;
3.0 Affected Environment: Noise
3-21
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
and various military aircraft. The majority of these aircraft arrive and depart on the primary runway:
Runway (RWY) 04/22. Based on current daily operations provided by SGRA and using NOISEMAP
technology, DNLs in the vicinity of SGRA are dominated by B-727s operating on RWY 04/22 and by
C-141s on RWY 34/16 (Table 3.2-5).
Table 3.2-5. Baseline SELs for Dominant Aircraft and Cumulative
DNLs for All Aircraft at Southwest Georgia Regional Airport*
Runway
Dominant Aircraft
SEL (dB)
DNL (dB)
22
04
34
16
B-727
B-727
C-141
C-141
108
108
110
110
69
69
58
56
Note: *Sound levels estimated at 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
3.2.3.2
VALDOSTA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Aircraft flying at Valdosta Regional Airport adhere to established flight paths and overfly the same areas
surrounding the airfield on a consistent basis. At Valdosta Regional Airport, noise from flight operations
typically occurs beneath main approach and departure corridors and in the immediate vicinity of the
airport. Valdosta Regional Airport currently handles approximately 56,575 annual airfield operations, or
155 airfield operations on an average busy day. Aircraft include HS-748s, C-130s, Learjet-35s, and
UH-60 helicopters. The majority of these aircraft arrive and depart on the primary runway: RWY 35/17.
Based on current daily operations provided by the airport and using NOISEMAP technology, DNLs in the
vicinity of Valdosta Regional Airport are dominated by HS-748s operating on RWY 35/17, UH-60
helicopters on RWY 22/04 and RWY 13, and C-130s on RWY 31 (Table 3.2-6).
Table 3.2-6. Baseline SELs for Dominant Aircraft and Cumulative
DNLs for All Aircraft at Valdosta Regional Airport*
Runway
Dominant Aircraft
SEL (dB)
DNL (dB)
35
17
22
04
31
13
HS-748
HS-748
UH-60A
UH-60A
C-130
UH-60
118
116
96
93
99
109
63
66
57
53
51
56
Note: *Sound levels estimated at 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
3.2.3.3
TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Aircraft flying at Tallahassee Regional Airport adhere to established flight paths and overfly the same
areas surrounding the airfield on a consistent basis. At Tallahassee Regional Airport, noise from flight
operations typically occurs beneath main approach and departure corridors and in the immediate vicinity
of the airport. Tallahassee Regional Airport currently handles approximately 330 airfield operations on
an average busy day. Aircraft include E-8As, HS-748s, MD-82s, B-737s, and various military aircraft.
The majority of these aircraft arrive and depart on the primary runway: RWY 27/09. Based on current
daily operations provided by the airport and using NOISEMAP technology, DNLs in the vicinity of
Tallahassee Regional Airport are dominated by E-8As operating on RWY 27/09 and HS-748s on RWY
18/36 (Table 3.2-7).
3-22
3.0 Affected Environment: Noise
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 3.2-7. Baseline SELs for Dominant Aircraft and Cumulative
DNLs for All Aircraft at Tallahassee Regional Airport*
Runway
Dominant Aircraft
SEL (dB)
DNL (dB)
27
09
18
36
E-8A
E-8A
HS-748
HS-748
113
110
93
91
72
70
58
59
Note: *Sound levels estimated at 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
3.2.3.4
LAKE CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
Aircraft flying at Lake City Airport adhere to established flight paths and overfly the same areas
surrounding the airfield on a consistent basis. At Lake City Municipal Airport, noise from flight
operations typically occurs beneath main approach and departure corridors and in the immediate vicinity
of the airport. The airport currently handles approximately 13,140 annual airfield operations or 36
airfield operations on an average busy day. Aircraft include B-727s, DC9-10s, and numerous single- and
twin-engine turboprop aircraft. The majority of these aircraft arrive and depart on the primary runway:
RWY 28/01. Based on current daily operations provided by the airport and using NOISEMAP
technology, DNLs in the vicinity of the airport are dominated by B-727s operating on RWY 28/01 and
DC9-10s and single-engine, fixed-pitch aircraft on RWY 23/05 (Table 3.2-8).
Table 3.2-8. Baseline SELs for Dominant Aircraft and Cumulative
DNLs for All Aircraft at Lake City Municipal Airport*
Runway
Dominant Aircraft
SEL (dB)
DNL (dB)
28
01
23
05
B-727
B-727
DC9-10
Single-engine, fixed-pitch
111
111
88
78
56
57
41
42
Note: *Sound levels estimated at 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
3.2.3.5
GAINESVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Aircraft flying at Gainesville Regional Airport adhere to established flight paths and overfly the same
areas surrounding the airfield on a consistent basis. At Gainesville Regional Airport, noise from flight
operations typically occurs beneath main approach and departure corridors and in the immediate vicinity
of the airport. The airport currently handles approximately 222 airfield operations on an average busy
day. Aircraft include Learjet-25s, C-9As, HS-748s, DH-6, and various military aircraft. The majority of
these aircraft arrive and depart on the primary runway: RWY 28/01. Based on current daily operations
provided by the airport and using NOISEMAP technology, DNLs in the vicinity of the airport are
dominated by Learjet-25s operating on RWY 28/01 (Table 3.2-9).
Table 3.2-9. Baseline SELs for Dominant Aircraft and Cumulative
DNLs for All Aircraft at Gainesville Regional Airport*
Runway
Dominant Aircraft
SEL (dB)
DNL (dB)
28
01
24
06
Learjet-25
Learjet-25
2-engine, turboprop
C-9A
108
108
83
104
65
67
49
58
Note: *Sound levels estimated at 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
3.0 Affected Environment: Noise
3-23
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.3 AIR QUALITY
Air quality in a given location is described by the concentrations of various pollutants in the atmosphere.
The National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) have been established by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) for criteria pollutants including carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2),
sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10),
particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5), ozone (O3), and lead (Pb). The NAAQS
represent the maximum levels of pollutants that are considered safe, with an additional margin of safety to
protect public health and welfare. Short-term standards (1-, 3-, 8-, and 24-hour periods) have been
established for pollutants contributing to acute health effects, while long-term standards (annual averages)
are established for pollutants contributing to chronic health effects.
The Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1990 places responsibility on individual states to achieve and maintain the
NAAQS. The primary mechanism for states to achieve and maintain the NAAQS is the EPA-required
State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP identifies goals, strategies, schedules, and enforcement actions
that are designed to reduce the level of pollutants in the air and bring the state into compliance with the
NAAQS. Each state has the authority to adopt standards stricter than those established under the federal
program.
The EPA designates all areas of the U.S. either as having air quality better than (attainment) or worse than
(non-attainment) the NAAQS. If there is insufficient air quality data for the EPA to form a basis for
attainment status, the area is then given an unclassified status. The criteria for non-attainment designation
varies by pollutant: 1) an area is in non-attainment for ozone if the NAAQS have been exceeded more
than three discontinuous times in 3 years, and 2) an area is in non-attainment for any other pollutant if
NAAQS have been exceeded more than once per year.
Chemical pollutants include hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) and toxic chemical air pollutants for which
occupational exposure limits have been established. Included in this definition are volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) which include any organic compound involved in atmospheric photochemical
reactions except those designated by an EPA administrator as having negligible photochemical reactivity.
VOCs are considered to be precursors to O3 formation. HAPs are not covered by ambient air quality
standards but may present a threat of adverse human health effects or adverse environmental effects under
certain conditions.
In addition to the NAAQS, the CAA established a national goal of preventing any further degradation or
impairment of visibility within federally designated attainment areas. Attainment areas are classified as
Class I, II, or III, and are subject to the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program.
Mandatory Class I status has been assigned by Congress to national wilderness areas, national parks
larger than 6,000 acres, and all international parks. Class III status is assigned to attainment areas to
allow maximum growth while maintaining compliance with the NAAQS. All other attainment areas are
designated Class II. In Class I areas, visibility impairment is defined as a reduction in regional visual
range and atmospheric discoloration or plume blight (such as emissions from a smokestack).
Determination of the significance of an impact on visibility within a PSD Class I area is typically
associated with stationary emission sources.
The CAA Section 176(c), General Conformity, established certain statutory requirements for federal
agencies with proposed federal activities to demonstrate conformity of the proposed activities with the
3.0 Affected Environment: Air Quality
3-25
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
SIP for attainment of the NAAQS. In 1993, the EPA issued the final rules for determining air quality
conformity. Under these rules, certain actions are exempted from conformity determinations, while
others are presumed to be in conformity if total project emissions are below de minimis levels established
under 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 93.153. Total project emissions include both direct
and indirect emissions that can be controlled by a federal agency. Any new project that may lead to
nonconformance or contribute to a violation of the NAAQS requires a conformity analysis before
initiating the action. The U.S. Department of the Air Force (Air Force) has published its own guidance,
the U.S. Air Force Conformity Guide (Air Force 1995b), to implement the conformity requirement. The
general conformity requirements apply only to non-attainment and maintenance areas.
Federal regulations (40 CFR 81) have created defined air quality control regions (AQCRs) for the entire
U.S. AQCRs are based on population and topographic criteria for groups of counties within a state, or
counties from multiple states that share a common geographical or pollutant concentration characteristic.
Region of Influence
The region of influence (ROI) for air quality under the proposed action includes the airspace surrounding
Moody Air Force Base (AFB) and the airspace used by Moody-based aircraft. Aircraft operations by
Moody-based aircraft currently occur in AQCRs 2, 5, 6, 49, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58, and 59. However, under
the proposed action, T-6A aircraft would only operate in Moody 1, Moody 3, and Live Oak Military
Operations Areas (MOAs) and Visual Routes (VRs) VR-1065 and VR-1066 (AQCRs 2, 5, 6, 49, 54, and
59) (Figure 3.3-1). T-38 aircraft would operate in the Moody 2 North and South (N/S) MOAs only
(AQCRs 49 and 59). Due to the small area covered by affected airspace in AQCRs 2 and 6, the following
baseline air quality discussion will focus on emissions within AQCRs 5, 49, 54, and 59. In addition, due
to the large area encompassed by the Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) area (85,000 square
nautical miles) and low number of proposed annual sortie-operations by T-6A aircraft (266), aircraft
emissions were not calculated for the LATN area.
Mixing Layer
The mixing layer (or mixing height) is defined as the altitude below which the most vigorous initial
mixing of air takes place. The mixing height can fluctuate, and is generally a function of weather,
seasonal variation, and topography present within a parcel of air. Mixing heights within the ROI can
fluctuate throughout the day and throughout the season. However, the commonly accepted mixing height
is 3,000 feet above ground level (AGL). Emissions released above this altitude can be inhibited, and
effectively blocked from mixing beneath a surface-based temperature inversion. Therefore, aircraft
emissions above the average mixing height (3,000 feet AGL) are unlikely to contribute to ground-level
pollutant concentrations (EPA 1992).
Regional Air Quality
Under the CAA, the EPA has delegated authority for regulating pollution sources to each state. The State
of Georgia has adopted primary and secondary NAAQS for all criteria pollutants (Table 3.3-1). The
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has adopted NAAQS for every criteria pollutant
except for SO2. For this pollutant, the FDEP has adopted the more stringent 24-hour and annual average
standards of 0.10 parts per million (ppm) and 0.02 ppm respectively (FDEP 1999b). According to
federally published attainment statuses, all of the counties within the ROI are either in attainment or
unclassified for all six criteria pollutants (EPA 1999d).
3-26
3.0 Affected Environment: Air Quality
3.0 Affected Environment: Air Quality
54
2
58
2
A
L
A
Á
Savannah
B
A
M
A
VR-1066
JÁ
Albany
MOODY 1 MOA
6
49
MOODY 3 MOA
G
E
O
R
G
I
A
59
MOODY 2 NORTH
MOA
PSD Class I Area
(Okefenokee
NWR)
Moody AFB
Valdosta
Á
J
VR-1065
TALLAHASSEE
5
F
L
O
R
J
R
I
MOODY 2
SOUTH
MOA
49
D
Atlantic
Ocean
Á
A
Jacksonville
J
Á
LIVE OAK
MOA
Lake
City
49
J
Á
Gulf
of
Gainesville
Mexico
LEGEND
49
Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) Boundary
State Boundary
County Boundary
Á
Cities and Towns
J
Military Training Route
Transition Training Airport
Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) Area
0
0
Statute Miles
15
15
Nautical Miles
30
30
Military Operations Area (MOA)
3-27
Air Quality Control Regions in Georgia, Florida, and Alabama
Figure 3.3-1
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 3.3-1. National and State (Georgia and Florida) Ambient Air Quality Standards
Air Pollutant
Averaging Time
Florida AAQS
CO
1-hour
8-hour
Annual
3-hour
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
1-houre
8-hourd
Quarterly average
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
0.50 ppm
0.10 ppm
0.02 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
0.12 ppm
0.08 ppm
1.5 µg/m3
NO2
SO2
PM2.5d
PM10
O3
Pb
Georgiaa and National AAQS
Primaryb
Secondaryc
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
0.14 ppm
0.03 ppm
65 µg/m3
15 µg/m3
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
0.12 ppm
0.08 ppm
1.5 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
0.12 ppm
0.08 ppm
1.5 µg/m3
Notes: ppm = parts per million.
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter.
a
Georgia has adopted all NAAQS.
b
Primary standards set limits to protect public health, including the health of “sensitive” populations such as
asthmatics, children, and the elderly.
c
Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare, including protection against decreased visibility and
damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings.
d
New standards for PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone standards were established in 1997; implementation guidelines have
not been adopted.
e
The ozone 1-hour standard applies only to designated non-attainment areas.
Sources: EPA 1999b, FDEP 1999b.
Three mandatory PSD Class I areas are found in AQCR 54: the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge
(NWR) in Charlton County, Georgia; Wolf Island NWR in McIntosh County, Georgia; and St. Marks
NWR in Wakulla and Jefferson Counties, Florida (see Figure 3.3-1).
Regional Climate
Georgia. Moody 1, Moody 2 N/S, and Moody 3 MOAs, and VR-1066 are considered to be within the
interior climate region of Georgia. Climate within this region is characterized as being humid subtropical.
During the summer months, the area is often influenced by long spells of warm and humid weather.
Average afternoon high temperatures range from the upper 80s degrees Fahrenheit (ºF) to low 90s ºF.
Temperatures during winter months are more variable, with stretches of mild weather alternating with
spells of cold weather. Winter high temperatures average in the 50s ºF, with temperatures below freezing
occurring from 50 to 70 days a year. Precipitation averages between 46 and 50 inches a year, with rain
falling approximately 120 days a year. Snowfall is considered rare and only happens on average a few
days each year. Winds usually fluctuate between 6 and 10 miles per hour, with winds typically coming
out of the north in the winter and from the south in the summer. Strong, gusty winds associated with
thunderstorms and tropical systems also affect the region.
Florida. Live Oak MOA and VR-1065 are considered to be within the Gulf Coast climate region.
Climate within this area of the Gulf of Mexico is subject to an abundance of sunshine and rainfall.
Winters are usually mild, and summers are typically warm and humid. Average summer high
temperatures are usually around the high 80s ºF, with days above 90 ºF occurring frequently. Average
winter low temperatures range in the low to mid 40s ºF, with a few days below 40 ºF. Annual rainfall
3-28
3.0 Affected Environment: Air Quality
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
averages approximately 57 to 60 inches, the majority of which falls in the late winter and early spring.
Most rain is in the form of frequent scattered showers of short duration and high intensity. Prevailing
winds are usually from the north in the winter and from the south in the summer. Onshore, afternoon sea
breezes less than 15 knots are common during the spring and summer months. March is the windiest
month, while August is typically the calmest. Thunderstorms and tropical systems do affect the region,
leading to strong, gusty winds and high rainfall intensities for short periods.
3.3.1
Moody AFB and Vicinity
The following sources contribute to baseline emissions at Moody AFB: stationary sources, aerospace
ground equipment (AGE), personal and base vehicles, and airfield operations (including trim test
activities). As listed in the following tables, VOCs, are considered to be precursors to the formation of
ozone in the atmosphere; nitrogen oxides (NOX) include NO2 and other related compounds; sulfur oxides
(SOX) include SO2 and other related compounds; and PM is equivalent to total suspended particles and
includes PM10.
3.3.1.1
STATIONARY SOURCES
Stationary emission sources include the following categories: abrasive blasting, storage tanks, boilers,
degreasing, emergency generators, explosive ordnance disposal/bombing range, equipment leaks, fuel cell
maintenance, fuel loading and dispensing, general chemical usage, jet engine testing, landfills/restoration
sites, nondestructive testing, open burning operations, pesticides and herbicides, small arms firing facility,
surface coating operations, wastewater treatment plants, welding operations, and woodworking operations
(Air Force 1999o). Annual Moody AFB emissions of criteria pollutants and total HAPs from stationary
sources are presented in Table3.3-2.
Table 3.3-2. Baseline Emissions from Stationary Sources at Moody AFB
Pollutant
CO
132.5
Emissions
(tons/year)
VOCs
61.8
NOx
12.5
SOx
3.4
PM10
18.0
HAPs
4.5
Source: Air Force 1999a.
3.3.1.2
AEROSPACE GROUND EQUIPMENT
AGE includes power generators, compressors, hydraulic test stands, weapons loading units and vehicles
(e.g., cranes and tows) used in aircraft ground support activities. Annual emissions from AGE at Moody
AFB are presented in Table 3.3-3.
Table 3.3-3. Baseline AGE Emissions at Moody AFB
Emissions
(tons/year)
CO
VOCs
Pollutant
NOx
SOx
PM10
27.4
4.0
6.6
3.3
3.6
Source: Air Force 1999a.
3.3.1.3
PERSONAL VEHICLE EMISSIONS
Personal vehicle emissions include emissions as a result of vehicular travel by employees to Moody AFB.
For this assessment, it was assumed that 1,303 base employees live on base (303 family housing units
plus 1,000 dormitory rooms at Moody AFB). The total number of people commuting each day equals
3.0 Affected Environment: Air Quality
3-29
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
approximately 2,003 (3,306 baseline manpower authorizations minus 1,303 non-commuting personnel).
Each commuter vehicle was assumed to contain 1.2 people. The average commute distance for off-base
residents is approximately 16 miles per round trip, 5 days per week, 50 weeks per year (1,669 daily round
trips and approximately 6.7 million miles per year). The average vehicle model year has been assumed to
be 1995. Emission factors have been taken from Calculation Methods for Criteria Air Pollutant Emission
Inventories (Air Force 1994a). Annual personal vehicle emissions are presented in Table 3.3-4.
Table 3.3-4. Baseline Emissions from Personal Vehicle Use at Moody AFB
Emissions
(tons/year)
CO
VOCs
Pollutant
NOx
SOx
PM10
122.0
18.2
12.1
< 0.1
0.5
Source: Air Force 1999a.
3.3.1.4
MOODY AFB VEHICLE OPERATIONS
Moody AFB vehicle emissions include emissions from buses, trains, tows, cranes, and fleet vehicles.
Annual criteria pollutant emissions from vehicles operating at Moody AFB are presented in Table 3.3-5.
Table 3.3-5. Baseline Emissions from Vehicle Operations at Moody AFB
Emissions
(tons/year)
CO
VOCs
Pollutant
NOx
75.5
11.6
64.4
SOx
PM10
< 0.1
4.8
Source: Air Force 1999a.
3.3.1.5
AIRFIELD OPERATIONS AT MOODY AFB
Using emission factors reported in Air Force (1994a), baseline emissions from aircraft takeoffs and
landings and closed pattern operations at Moody AFB were calculated. Engine run-up (trim test)
emissions from minor engine maintenance have also been included in airfield operations calculations.
Because engine run-ups can occur anywhere on the ramp, trim test emissions are considered mobile
sources. Annual emissions as a result of trim tests by aircraft at Moody AFB have been estimated using
the Air Force’s Air Conformity Applicability Model [ACAM] (Air Force 1996a). Annual Moody AFB
airfield emissions are presented in Table 3.3-6.
Table 3.3-6. Baseline Emissions from Airfield Operations at Moody AFB
Airfield Operation1
Engine Run-ups
Landings and Takeoffs
Closed Pattern
Total
Annual
Operations2
CO
N/A
44,368
67,192
111,560
186.8
668.2
194.8
1,049.8
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
30.6
108.4
15.4
154.4
5.8
23.8
29.3
58.9
2.3
11.0
7.1
20.4
PM10
0.8
1.5
0.7
3.0
Notes: 1To calculate emissions, landing, takeoffs, and closed patterns are considered as one cycle; therefore, annual
airfield operations are halved.
2
Includes operations conducted at Moody AFB by aircraft from other bases.
Source: Air Force 1999a.
3-30
3.0 Affected Environment: Air Quality
T-6A Beddown EA
3.3.2
Final
Airspace
Baseline airspace emissions were calculated as a function of the type of aircraft operating within the
airspace, the number of operations, the amount of time per operation, and by emissions factors associated
with appropriate power settings (Air Force 1994a). Airspace associated with the proposed action include:
Moody 1, Moody 2 N/S (T-38s only), Moody 3, and Live Oak MOAs; VR-1065; VR-1066; and the
Moody Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) area. However, as emissions from aircraft operating
above 3,000 feet AGL are not expected to affect surface air quality (refer to previous discussion of
Mixing Layer), emissions from the following MOAs (which have floor altitudes of 8,000 feet above mean
seal level [MSL]) have not been analyzed: Moody 1, Moody 3, and Live Oak. In addition, due to the
large area encompassed by the LATN area (85,000 square nautical miles) and low number of proposed
annual sortie-operations by T-6A aircraft (266), aircraft emissions were not calculated for the LATN area.
Table 3.3-7 presents estimated aircraft emissions for each airspace potentially affected by the proposed
action. Table 3.3-8 summarizes estimated aircraft emissions by AQCR.
Table 3.3-7. Baseline Airspace Emissions
Airspace
Moody 2 MOA (N/S)2
VR-1065
VR-1066
Total
SortieOperations1
CO
957
77
692
1,726
5.9
5.8
57.1
68.9
Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOX
SOX
1.1
0.2
1.6
2.9
40.4
3.5
28.6
72.5
5.2
0.4
2.8
8.3
PM10
1.5
0.1
0.3
1.9
Notes: 1Operations in the LATN have not been included in this analysis.
2
Proposed operations in the Moody 2 N/S MOAs would be conducted by T-38 aircraft only.
Table 3.3-8. Baseline Airspace Emissions by AQCR
AQCR
Sortie-Operations
5
49
54
59
Total
46
1,140
104
436
1,726
1
CO
3.5
50.1
8.6
6.7
68.9
Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOX
SOX
0.1
2.0
0.2
0.6
2.9
2.1
47.6
4.3
18.5
72.5
0.2
5.4
0.4
2.3
8.3
PM10
0.1
1.2
0.0
0.6
1.9
Note: 1Operations in the LATN have not been included in this analysis.
Sortie-operations in each AQCR have been determined by the percentages of each airspace within each AQCR.
3.3.3
Transition Training Airports
Although the counties in which each of the transition airports are located are all in attainment (EPA
1999d), specific air quality data for each of the five transition airports either do not exist or are outdated
(i.e., airfield operations have changed since the last air quality analysis was done). Additionally, state and
federal air quality monitoring sites are typically located near major metropolitan areas where air quality is
of concern. Therefore, baseline air quality data for each of the five transition training airports are not
available. In order to approximate baseline air quality conditions at the five transition airports, current
aircraft airfield operations were used to estimate emissions resulting from airfield operations. Estimates
were made using ACAM (Air Force 1996a) and appropriate emission factors (Air Force 1994a). This
approach provides a baseline condition for each of the five transition training airports. Air emissions
from other sources in the general vicinity (e.g., industrial and mobile sources) are not included in this
baseline analysis. However, since the proposed action would occur only within the airspace associated
3.0 Affected Environment: Air Quality
3-31
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
with each of the five transition training airports, the establishment of baseline airfield operating emissions
allows for the assessment of potential air quality impacts resulting from the proposed action.
Tables 3.3-9 through 3.3-13 present baseline air quality as a result of airfield operations for each of the
five transition training airports. The proposed transition training airports found in Florida are within
AQCR 49 and those in Georgia are within AQCR 59.
3.3.3.1
SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Currently there are approximately 115 airport operations per day at Southwest Georgia Regional Airport
(SGRA) consisting of commercial aircraft, general aviation aircraft (a small flying school), and military
aircraft and helicopter operations. Military aircraft include C-12s, C-9s, C-130s, C-141s, and UH-60
helicopters. Commercial and general aviation aircraft include B-727s, B-757s, MU-300s, and CL-601s.
Table 3.3-9. Representative Baseline Ambient Air Quality for Southwest Georgia
Regional Airport
3.3.3.2
CO
VOCs
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
NOx
SOx
PM10
168.1
49.5
33.3
4.2
6.6
VALDOSTA REGIONAL AIRPORT
There are approximately 155 airport operations per day at Valdosta Regional Airport consisting of
commercial commuter airline services, general aviation, and military aircraft. Aircraft include HS-748s,
C-130s, Learjet-35s, and UH-60 helicopters.
Table 3.3-10. Representative Baseline Ambient Air Quality for Valdosta Regional
Airport
3.3.3.3
CO
VOCs
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
NOx
SOx
PM10
118.3
36.6
19.0
2.9
3.8
TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
The Tallahassee Regional Airport currently serves a variety of users including five commercial airlines,
commuter and charter aircraft, air cargo operations, corporate aviation, general light aircraft flight
training, military, and agency aircraft (Florida Forest Service and Florida Bureau of Aviation). Current
airport operations average approximately 330 per day. Military aircraft include A-10s, E-8As, F-15Es,
F-16s, T-37s, T-38s, and UH-60s. Commercial and general aviation aircraft include B-737s, MD-82s,
MU-300s, CL-601s, HS-748s, and DH-6s.
Table 3.3-11. Representative Baseline Ambient Air Quality for Tallahassee
Regional Airport
3-32
CO
VOCs
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
NOx
SOx
PM10
349.2
135.0
41.0
7.0
9.8
3.0 Affected Environment: Air Quality
T-6A Beddown EA
3.3.3.4
Final
LAKE CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
The Lake City Municipal Airport has general aviation aircraft, a flight school, and an aircraft maintenance
depot for B-727 and DC-9 type aircraft (TIMCO, Inc); there is no scheduled commercial passenger air
service into the airport (Lake City Municipal Airport 1999). Currently there are approximately 36 airport
operations per day including military, commercial, and general aviation aircraft. Military aircraft include
C-9As and P-3As. Commercial and general aviation aircraft include L-1011s, B-727s, B-737s, and
DC-9-1s.
Table 3.3-12. Representative Baseline Ambient Air Quality for Lake City
Municipal Airport
3.3.3.5
CO
VOCs
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
NOx
SOx
PM10
61.7
8.4
5.8
1.0
2.5
GAINESVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Daily airport operations at the Gainesville Regional Airport average approximately 222 consisting of
commercial commuter jet services, general aviation, military aircraft operations, and light aircraft flight
training. Military aircraft include C-9As and P-3As. Commercial and general aviation aircraft include
DC-9-3s, Lear Jets, CL-601s, and HS-748s. In addition, UH-60 helicopter operations also occur.
Table 3.3-13. Representative Baseline Ambient Air Quality for Gainesville
Regional Airport
CO
VOCs
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
NOx
SOx
PM10
272.7
36.9
25.7
3.3
12.3
3.0 Affected Environment: Air Quality
3-33
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.4 SAFETY
The primary safety issues addressed in this environmental assessment (EA) are fire and crash safety and
flight safety associated with military operations, including bird-aircraft strikes and aircraft mishaps. For
Moody Air Force Base (AFB) and the transition training airports the region of influence (ROI) for safety
includes the runways, base, and the area defined by airfield approach and departure paths. Within this
ROI, safety topics include fire and crash response, flight risks associated with bird-aircraft strikes and
aircraft mishaps, and Accident Potential Zones (APZs) or Runway Protection Zones (RPZs). Safety risks
within Grand Bay Range and the associated airspace involve flight risks, fire and crash safety, and
ordnance use. Safety issues within other airspace (i.e., Military Operations Areas [MOAs] and Military
Training Routes [MTRs]) consist primarily of flight risks.
3.4.1
3.4.1.1
Moody AFB and Vicinity
FLIGHT RISKS
Aircraft Mishaps. The Air Force defines four categories of aircraft mishaps: Classes A, B, and C, and
High Accident Potential. Class A mishaps are those that result in either loss of life or permanent total
disability, a total cost in excess of $1 million, destruction of an aircraft, or damage to an aircraft beyond
economical repair. Class B mishaps do not result in fatalities but result in total costs of $200,000 or more
but less than $1 million or that result in permanent, partial disability. Class C mishaps involve costs of
$10,000 to $200,000 or the loss of worker productivity of more than 8 hours. High Accident Potential
mishaps represent minor incidents not meeting any of the criteria for Classes A, B, or C; they involve
minor damage, minor injuries, and little or no property or public interactions.
Based on historical mishap data at all military installations under all conditions of flight, the Department
of Defense (DoD) calculates a Class A mishap rate per 100,000 flying hours for each type of aircraft in
the inventory. Although the Air Force does not have historical T-6A operational data, based on the T-6A
training flight profile and operating characteristics, the Class A mishap rate is estimated to be
approximately 1 per 150,000 flying hours or 0.67 per 100,000 flying hours (Air Force 1999y).
Bird-Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH). Another major concern with regard to flight safety is BASH.
Aircraft may encounter birds at altitudes up to 30,000 feet. However, most birds fly close to the ground;
over half of all reported bird-strikes occur below 500 feet above ground level (AGL), and over 75 percent
occur below 2,000 feet AGL (U.S. Air Force Safety Center 1999). Of these strikes, approximately 50
percent occur in the airfield environment, and 25 percent occur during low altitude training. The Air
Force BASH program was established to minimize the risk for collisions of birds and aircraft and the
subsequent loss of life and property. For airspace used by Moody AFB aircrews, the risk of bird-aircraft
strikes varies throughout the year. As a result, pilots and safety officers continually evaluate BASH
potential.
In addition, the Air Force Safety Center BASH team has developed a Bird Avoidance Model (BAM) that
quantifies risk levels for bird-aircraft strike potential. BAM ratings are Low, Moderate, and Severe (Air
Force 1999z). Moody AFB Instruction 11-250, Airfield Operations, and the Moody AFB BASH Plan
(Moody AFB 1996) address measures that must be followed when bird conditions are deemed moderate
or severe. During moderate conditions, airfield pattern altitudes are increased and takeoffs and landings
will be avoided within 1 hour of dawn or dusk. During severe conditions, the Operations Group
Commander closes the tower pattern, allowing no takeoffs, and allows only single-aircraft landings..
3.0 Affected Environment: Safety
3-35
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Aircraft from Moody AFB have been involved in 213 recorded bird strikes for the period from January
1990 to May 1999 or an average of 22 bird strikes per year. Most (71 percent) of the BASH incidents
involved F-16 and A-10 aircraft, 130 and 22 incidents, respectively. Of the 213 incidents, 72 (or an
average of 7.6 per year) were identified as occurring in the airspace environment of Moody AFB.
Aircrews based at Moody AFB have historically experienced bird-strike incidents ranging from 11 to 30
per year (Moody AFB 1999b; Air Force 1999y). From January 1990 through May 1999, there have been
13 BASH-related Class C mishaps involving Moody based aircraft: 8 F-16s, 3 A-10s, 1 C-130, and 1
C-141; there were no Class A or B mishaps (Air Force 1999y).
3.4.1.2
ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES
APZs consist of three different areas (Clear Zone [CZ], APZ I, and APZ II) which extend out from the
ends of active runways at military airfields. The CZ is the area closest to the end of the runway and
represents the highest overall potential for accidents. Consequently, all construction is prohibited in the
CZ. APZ I is an area beyond the CZ and has a significant accident potential. Land uses in this zone are
usually limited to light industrial, manufacturing, transportation, communications, open space, and
agricultural uses. However, uses that concentrate people in small areas are not considered acceptable.
APZ II extends beyond APZ I and represents the lowest accident potential of the three zones. Land uses
within APZ II include all those considered compatible with APZ I, as well as low-density residential,
service, and retail trade. However, uses that concentrate high densities of people in small areas are not
considered appropriate.
3.4.1.3
FIRE AND CRASH SAFETY
Air Force standards specify fire and crash emergency service requirements for the amount and type of fire
and crash equipment and for the number of personnel necessary to handle an aircraft mishap. These
standards are based on the number and type of aircraft, type of flying missions, and size of the buildings
at the installation. Moody AFB’s fire and crash emergency services meet these standards. In addition,
the Moody AFB fire department has mutual support agreements with nearby communities in case an
exceptionally severe aircraft mishap occurs.
3.4.2
3.4.2.1
Grand Bay Range, MOAs, and MTRs
GRAND BAY RANGE
Restricted Area R-3008 overlies Grand Bay Range. Safety risks within this area involve flight risks, fire
and crash safety, and ordnance use. Defined geographic areas called “footprints” have been developed
within the target impact boundaries representing the areas where ordnance is expected to land during
training missions.
Ordnance is delivered annually onto targets within the Grand Bay Range target impact areas by HH-60
helicopters, AT-38s, and transient aircraft from other installations (e.g., A-10s, F-16s). The most
common ordnance used at the ranges is 7.62-mm and 20-mm ammunition, and 25-pound bomb dummy
unit (BDU)-33s (Air Force 1999a). When Grand Bay Range is in use, Bemiss Field is closed to all
activities due to safety considerations.
Trained explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) personnel inspect all ordnance debris. A complete boundaryto-boundary debris clearance is conducted every 5 years. On rare occasions, training ordnance spotting
charges do not detonate upon impact. In these circumstances, EOD personnel are dispatched to handle
the collection and disposal of the unused ordnance (Air Force 1999a).
3-36
3.0 Affected Environment: Safety
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
There have been two bird-aircraft strikes within R-3008 since October 1997. One incident involved an
HC-130 and one an F-16 (Air Force 1999a).
3.4.2.2
MOAS
Moody 1, 3, and Live Oak MOAs have a floor altitude of 8,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL), while
the floors of Moody 2 North and South (N/S) are 500 feet AGL and 100 feet AGL, respectively. Five
bird-aircraft strikes have been documented within the MOAs since January 1990, representing
approximately 2 percent of all documented incidents involving Moody based aircraft during this time. Of
the four incidents that occurred within the Moody 2 MOA, three involved F-16s flying at greater than 400
knots indicated air speed (KIAS) and at altitudes between 400 and 1,500 feet AGL. The single recorded
bird-aircraft strike in Moody 1 MOA involved an F-16 at 16,700 feet AGL at 300 KIAS (Air Force
1999y). Daytime BAM hazard ratings for the affected MOAs range from moderate to severe for daytime
hours and from low to moderate for night hours (refer to Table B-3 in Appendix B). Severe ratings only
occur during the winter and spring daytime hours for Moody 1 and Moody 3 MOAs.
3.4.2.3
MTRS
Although 28 bird-aircraft strike incidents have been recorded in MTRs used by Moody-based aircraft,
only 2 are recorded from an MTR proposed for use under the proposed action: VR-1066. Both these
incidents involved F-16s flying at 480 KIAS and at 1,000 and 1,150 feet AGL. Year-round BAM ratings
for both VR-1065 and VR-1066 are moderate and low for day and night hours, respectively (refer to
Table B-3 in Appendix B) (Air Force 1999z). Moody AFB Instruction 11-250, Airfield Operations, and
the Moody AFB BASH Plan (Moody AFB 1996), address measures that must be followed when BAM
conditions are deemed moderate or severe. During moderate conditions, 1,000 feet AGL restrictions are
imposed for MTRs.
3.4.3
3.4.3.1
Transition Training Airports
SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport (SGRA) has an Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility
located at the north end of the airfield. The ARFF maintains two Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
approved fire-fighting vehicles, with a third one proposed to be added during the next year. The facility is
staffed by city employees and is a 24-hour operation. The vehicles carry water and aqueous film-forming
foam agent. Dry chemicals are also available for fire suppression. The airport provides a Notice to
Airmen (NOTAM) that a bird hazard exists from September to February. There have been no major
aircraft mishaps in the past 5 years (SGRA 1999).
All civilian airports have areas known as RPZs which are similar in purpose to the APZs found at military
airfields. RPZs are trapezoidal areas at the end of the runway to enhance the protection of people and
property on the ground in the event an aircraft lands or crashes beyond the runway end. The size or
dimension of these RPZs are dictated by guidelines set forth in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300 (FAA
1999). Refer to Figure 3.12-11 for the locations of the RPZs at SGRA.
3.4.3.2
VALDOSTA REGIONAL AIRPORT
The airport has one new vehicle that provides FAA approved fire-fighting and rescue capabilities at the
ARFF facility. The facility is located midfield on the eastside of the runway. The facility is staffed by
city personnel and operates 24 hours per day. The vehicle carries water and aqueous film-forming foam
agent along with dry chemicals. There have been no major aircraft mishaps in the past 5 years (Valdosta
3.0 Affected Environment: Safety
3-37
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Regional Airport 1999). Refer to Figure 3.12-12 for the locations of the RPZs for the Valdosta Regional
Airport.
3.4.3.3
TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
The fire-fighting capabilities at Tallahassee Region Airport include two vehicles that carry 3,000 pounds
of water and aqueous film-forming foam agent along with dry chemicals. There is one smaller vehicle
that carries 1,500 pounds of agent and water and also functions as the on-scene command post. The
ARFF facility, located between Runway 09 and Runway 36, is manned by city employees and is
operational during flight operations (6:00 A.M. until 11:00 P.M. or until the end of scheduled flights). No
changes or additions are scheduled for the ARFF facility in the near future. There have been three major
aircraft accidents involving only general aviation aircraft (two within 5 miles of the field) in the past 5
years (Tallahassee Regional Airport Fire Department 1999). Refer to Figure 3.12-13 for the locations of
the RPZs for the Tallahassee Regional Airport.
3.4.3.4
LAKE CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
Lake City Municipal Airport has a five-bay ARFF facility located at the airfield. It is a 24-hour operation
and staffed, operated, and maintained by TIMCO, Inc., a private aircraft maintenance repair facility. No
mishap data are maintained for the airfield (TIMCO, Inc. 1999). Refer to Figure 3.12-14 for the locations
of the RPZs for the Lake City Municipal Airport.
3.4.3.5
GAINESVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
The Gainesville Regional Airport has a two-bay ARFF facility located on the airfield. The facility is
staffed by city personnel operating two vehicles. The vehicles carry water and aqueous film-forming
foam agent. In addition, one truck carries dry chemicals. No mishap data are maintained for the airfield.
Station Six ARFF is manned during normal airport flight-operations hours (Gainesville Regional Airport
1999a). Refer to Figure 3.12-15 for the locations of the RPZs at the Gainesville Regional Airport.
3-38
3.0 Affected Environment: Safety
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND HAZARDOUS WASTES
As defined in 49 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 171.8, hazardous materials are materials
which have been determined by the Secretary of Transportation to be capable of posing an unreasonable
risk to health, safety, and property when transported in commerce. Hazardous wastes, as defined in the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, are substances with strong physical
properties of ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity which may cause an increase in mortality, a
serious irreversible illness, an incapacitating reversible illness, or pose a substantial threat to human
health or the environment.
Hazardous materials and wastes are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in
accordance with Federal Water Pollution Control Act; Clean Water Act; Solid Waste Disposal Act; Toxic
Substance Control Act; RCRA; Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act; and Clean Air Act. The federal government is required to comply with these acts and all applicable
state regulations under Executive Order (EO) 12088, Federal Compliance with Pollution Control
Standards; Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 4165.60, Solid Waste Management; Air Force
Instruction (AFI) 32-7042, Solid and Hazardous Waste Compliance; AFI 32-7080, Pollution Prevention
Program; AFI 32-7086, Hazardous Materials Management; and Air Force Pamphlet (AFPAM) 32-7043,
Hazardous Wastes Management Guide.
The Region of Influence (ROI) for hazardous materials and wastes includes Moody Air Force Base
(AFB), areas immediately surrounding the base, and associated airspace. Moody-based aircraft currently
operate in Military Training Routes (MTRs) and Military Operations Areas (MOAs) included under the
proposed action. However, because current and proposed aircraft operations would not generate or
dispose of hazardous wastes in these areas, a discussion of hazardous materials and wastes beneath the
affected airspace (MTRs and MOAs) has not been provided. Additionally, because aircraft included
under the proposed action would not be using or generating any hazardous material or wastes at any of the
proposed transition training airports, a discussion of hazardous materials and wastes will not be provided
for these locations.
3.5.1
Moody AFB and Vicinity
Moody AFB generates approximately 76,500 pounds of hazardous waste per year, or approximately 6,500
pounds per month (Table 3.5-1). The largest amount of hazardous waste at Moody AFB (approximately
78 percent) is generated as a result of aircraft support functions. These functions include hydraulics,
structural maintenance, aerospace ground equipment (AGE), munitions maintenance, corrosion control,
painting, and wheel and tire maintenance (U.S. Department of the Air Force [Air Force] 1999a). The
EPA designates facilities as being a large quantity generator of hazardous waste if for any month during
the year, hazardous waste generation exceeds approximately 2,200 pounds. Therefore, Moody AFB is
designated as a large quantity generator of hazardous waste.
Aircraft units at Moody AFB generate wastes including oil, fuel, hydraulic fluid, paint, thinners, solvents,
aerosol cans, batteries, and spill absorbent materials (e.g., rags). Liquids and sludge containing arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, and lead are generated as a result of aircraft washing activities (Air Force 1999a).
3.0 Affected Environment: Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Wastes
3-39
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 3.5-1. Baseline Hazardous Waste Generation at Moody AFB
Hazardous Waste Source
(# of aircraft)
Amount
(pounds/year)
HH-60 Helicopters (14)
HC-130 Aircraft (9)
T-38 Aircraft (57)
Other Aircraft Support Functions
Subtotal-Aircraft Support Functions
Subtotal-All Other Functions
Total
12,100
8,100
23,000
12,650
55,850
20,650
76,500
Source: Air Force 1999a.
3.5.1.1
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Operations at Moody AFB require the use and storage of many hazardous materials. These materials
include flammable and combustible liquids, acids, aerosols, alcohols, batteries, corrosives, caustics,
compressed gases, fire retardants, herbicides, hydraulic fluids, photographic chemicals, sealants, solvents,
paints, paint thinners, pesticides, and a number of petroleum, oils, and lubricants (POL) (Air Force
1998a).
The Moody AFB Spill Prevention and Response Plan specifies protocols for responding to releases,
accidents, and spills involving POL or hazardous substances. Protocols described in the Spill Prevention
and Response Plan includes spill detection, spill reporting, spill containment, and proper cleanup and
disposal methods (Moody AFB 1997a). In addition, in accordance with AFI 32-7080, Pollution
Prevention Program, Moody AFB is required to reduce dependence on hazardous materials, reduce waste
streams, reuse generated waste, and recycle waste that is not reusable (e.g., used oil, lead acid batteries).
Asbestos, due to its ability to withstand heat, fire and chemicals, was historically used in construction
materials (Watts 1998). Because asbestos is an identified human carcinogen, use of asbestos-containing
materials (materials containing more than 1 percent asbestos) in recent construction activities has been
disallowed. However, many of the buildings constructed at Moody AFB date back to the 1940s when use
of asbestos in construction materials was common. Therefore, it is believed that a moderate percentage of
buildings at Moody AFB may have asbestos-containing materials (Air Force 1998a).
3.5.1.2
HAZARDOUS WASTE
The RCRA regulates the handling, storage, recycling, and disposal of hazardous wastes and materials.
The Moody AFB Hazardous Waste Management Plan was developed to satisfy the requirements
established in 40 CFR, Parts 260-270, in addition to the requirements developed by the Georgia
Department of Natural Resources (GDNR). The plan sets forth procedures to achieve and maintain
regulatory compliance for the accumulation, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials and
wastes (Moody AFB 1998).
Hazardous wastes are initially collected at one of 50 satellite accumulation points that have been
established at Moody AFB. Wastes are then transferred to one of three 90-Day Hazardous Waste Storage
Areas: Hydrazine facility, Roads and Grounds facility, and HAZMART facility. The HAZMART
facility is responsible for receiving wastes from satellite accumulation points and the other two 90-day
Hazardous Waste Storage Areas. Materials gathered at this area are analyzed, characterized, prepared for
shipment, and forwarded from the HAZMART facility to the Defense Reutilization and Management
Office for final disposal (Moody AFB 1998).
3-40
3.0 Affected Environment: Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Wastes
T-6A Beddown EA
3.5.1.3
Final
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PROGRAM
The Environmental Restoration Program (ERP) is the process by which contaminated sites and facilities
are identified and characterized, and existing contamination is contained, removed and disposed of to
allow for beneficial reuse of the property. ERP sites include landfills, underground waste fuel storage
areas, and maintenance generated wastes. Of the 31 sites located at Moody AFB, 5 have been approved
by the GDNR for No Further Action (NFA) and 6 have had NFA Decision Documents submitted for
GDNR review. The remaining sites are in various stages of investigation (Air Force 1999i).
Site closures are expected for all sites at Moody AFB by 2015. Some sites will require remedial actions
to achieve regulatory compliance on closure. Examples of cleanup actions that might take place include
landfill caps or covers, soil vapor extraction, air sparging, excavation, and natural attenuation. In
addition, some remedies might include the imposition of Institutional Controls to allow for long-term site
management in cases where all contamination can’t be removed from the site. Since some remedies
require an extended period of time to reduce the volume or toxicity of contaminants, any construction that
occurs on or near any ERP site requires a waiver from Headquarters Air Combat Command,
Environmental Division (HQ ACC/CEV). The goal of the waiver process is to control reasonably
foreseeable impacts to human health or the environment (Air Force 1999r).
3.0 Affected Environment: Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Wastes
3-41
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.6 EARTH RESOURCES
Earth resources are defined as the geology, topography, and soils of a given area. The geology of an area
includes bedrock materials, mineral deposits, and fossil remains. Topography refers to terrain, dominant
landforms, and other visible features. Soils are unconsolidated materials on or near the surface and are
defined by classifications and associations. A soil classification is a broad term for the general type of
soil found in a larger area (e.g., hydric, alluvial, or clay soils). Soil associations are site-specific based on
the particular soil type or complex found at that location.
The region of influence (ROI) for the proposed action consists of Moody Air Force Base (AFB) where
proposed construction and ground-disturbing activities would occur. Ground-disturbing activities would
not occur on land under any airspace unit or at any transition-training airport proposed for use under the
proposed action. Therefore, these areas are excluded from further analysis of earth resources for the
proposed action.
3.6.1
3.6.1.1
Moody AFB and Vicinity
GEOLOGY
Moody AFB is located in the Coastal Terraces region of the Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic
province. Most of the sediments in the area average about 150 feet in thickness. The area is
characterized by sandy clay interbedded with fine sand to coarse-grained sand and sandy limestone (U.S.
Department of Agriculture [USDA] 1979).
3.6.1.2
TOPOGRAPHY
Terrain characteristics in the region include flat to sloping plateaus separated by shallow river valleys and
broad wet depressions. Moody AFB is located on a level plateau between the Withlacoochee River on the
west and the Alapaha River on the east. The area consists mainly of wetlands and hardwood forest. The
eastern portion of the base is located in a low area known as the Grand Bay Swamp. Terrain elevation on
the installation ranges from approximately 190 feet above mean sea level (MSL) on the eastern portion to
about 240 feet MSL near the center of the base; slopes range from 0 to 5 percent.
Moody AFB also contains karst topographical traits. Karst topography is marked by circular depressions
formed from groundwater erosion of the underlying limestone. The depressions, also known as lime
sinks or sinkholes, vary greatly in size and depth and are partially filled with alluvium from the
surrounding uplands. Some contain large amounts of peat and are often inundated with water throughout
the year (USDA 1979). These characteristics exist at Moody AFB due to the thinner overburden
materials and higher elevations of the underlying limestone layers (Moody AFB 1994). Consequently,
testing of soil stability and load bearing capacity is a requirement before implementing any construction
project (USDA 1979).
3.6.1.3
SOILS
Moody AFB is located in the Tifton Upland District of the Lower Coastal Plain. General characteristics
of this region include well-drained soils and slopes ranging from 0 to 12 percent. The upland soils were
formed from deep sedimentary sands and clays, with lower alluvial soils formed from eroded uplands
(Moody AFB 1994).
3.0 Affected Environment: Earth Resources
3-43
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
The two most dominant soil associations at Moody AFB include the Tifton-Pelham-Fuquay and the
Dasher associations. The majority of the cantonment area (located immediately east of State Highway
125) consists of the Tifton-Pelham-Fuquay association containing soils with a sandy surface layer and
loamy subsoil. Tifton and Fuquay soils are generally located along the ridges, and Pelham soils are
located in drainageways and periodic inundated depressions. The Dasher association covers the majority
of the Grand Bay Range and consists of soils in marshes, swamps, and drainageways. The soils are very
poorly drained, with the surface layer consisting of approximately eight inches of mud deposits. The
underlying organic material extends to a depth of 75 inches or more (Moody AFB 1994).
Soil erosion has not historically been a problem at Moody AFB due to the relatively level terrain and the
current practice of keeping military vehicles in previously disturbed training areas and on existing
roadways (paved and dirt).
3-44
3.0 Affected Environment: Earth Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.7 WATER RESOURCES
Water resources include both surface and subsurface water. Surface water includes all lakes, ponds,
rivers, streams, impoundments, and wetlands within a defined area or watershed. Subsurface water,
commonly referred to as groundwater, is typically found in certain areas known as aquifers. Aquifers are
areas of mostly high porosity soil where water can be stored between soil particles and within soil pore
spaces. Groundwater is usually recharged during rain events and is withdrawn for domestic, agricultural,
and industrial purposes.
The Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 is the primary federal law that protects the nation’s waters,
including lakes, rivers, aquifers and coastal areas. The primary objective of the CWA is to restore and
maintain the integrity of the nation’s waters.
Water resources analyzed in this section include the watersheds and aquifers associated with Moody Air
Force Base (AFB). Flood hazards associated with the 100-year floodplain (areas generally subject to
major flooding once every 100 years) are also addressed in this section. Activities occurring within the
affected airspace and at the five transition training airports are not analyzed, because water resources in
these areas would not be affected by proposed aircraft operations.
3.7.1
3.7.1.1
Moody AFB and Vicinity
SURFACE WATER
Moody AFB is located within the Alapaha Watershed Unit. The Alapaha Watershed Unit is
approximately 1.2 million acres in size, and drains to the southwest, into the Upper Suwannee River
Watershed (1.7 million acres). The Upper Suwannee River Watershed drains into the Lower Suwannee
River Watershed (1 million acres) which in turn flows into the Gulf of Mexico. Watershed health in the
Alapaha Watershed is described as being of “better quality.” Watershed health within the Upper and
Lower Suwannee River Watersheds is described as being “less serious” (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency [EPA] 1999a).
Moody AFB is located on a level plateau between the Withlacoochee River (to the west) and Alapaha
River (to the east). Surface water from the eastern portion of Moody AFB flows towards Grand Bay
Creek, located at the southeastern portion of the installation. Grand Bay Creek then flows southeast into
the Alapaha River and eventually empties into the Suwannee River. Surface water from the western
portion of Moody AFB flows south into Mud Creek, which in turn flows into Grand Bay Creek. Surface
water from the southern part of the main base flows into Mission Lake, which in turn flows into Grand
Bay. Surface water on the northern portion of the main base flows into Beatty Branch, which then flows
into Cat Creek and then into the Withlacoochee River (U.S. Department of the Air Force [Air Force]
1999a).
Approximately 6,900 acres of Moody AFB are covered by wetlands. The eastern portion of Moody AFB
is a part of the Grand Bay/Banks Lake Wetland complex. This swamp complex, covering approximately
13,000 acres, is the largest freshwater lake/swamp system in the coastal plain of Georgia, with the
exception of the Okefenokee Swamp. Wetlands in this complex are composed of several broad Carolina
bays (1 to 4 miles across) and shallow lakes, interconnected by cypress-blackgum swamps. Banks Lake
is located northeast of Moody AFB and occupies about 13 square miles, of which only 25 percent is open
water; the remaining portions are covered by shrub or forest swamp. The northern portion of Banks Lake
3.0 Affected Environment: Water Resources
3-45
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
drains to the northeast into Mill Creek, a tributary of Big Creek, which discharges into the Alapaha River,
and ultimately into the Suwannee River.
Moody AFB contains four small lakes or ponds: Mission Lake, Quiet Pines Lake, Shiner Pond, and Lotts
Pond. Mission Lake, located to the southwest of the runways, is approximately 30 acres in size and is the
primary source for outdoor recreational activities at Moody AFB. Quiet Pines Lake is located between
the housing area and the golf course. It covers only 3 acres but is stocked for fishing (Air Force 1999k).
3.7.1.2
GROUNDWATER
Moody AFB is located within the Georgia Coastal Plain. This region has two major groundwater bearing
zones. The surficial aquifer system, consisting primarily of unconsolidated sands and gravel, is the major
groundwater-bearing unit in the area (approximately 1,429 square miles). The Floridan aquifer,
consisting primarily of carbonate rock, is also present in the area (approximately 27 square miles).
However, the Floridan aquifer system is considered to be the primary water-bearing unit in the area. The
majority of groundwater extracted from this area is used for domestic or industrial purposes (EPA 1999a).
Water quality and groundwater yields within this aquifer are generally considered good (Air Force
1999a).
Moody AFB operates an internal water system that includes three wells located near the water treatment
plant. The three wells (Numbers 1, 2, and 3), have a combined capacity of 94,800 gallons per hour (or
approximately 1.5 million gallons per day) and supply the main cantonment and family housing areas. In
addition, there are seven wells located throughout the remainder of Moody AFB. They are used to
provide water for fire protection, air conditioning, recreation, and personnel support in more isolated
areas (Air Force 1999k). Outside Moody AFB, shallow wells, ranging from 30 to 60 feet deep into the
surficial aquifer, adequately supply water for domestic use in the area. During times of extreme drought,
deeper wells ranging from 120 to 150 feet in depth have provided water for most towns in southern
Lowndes County (Air Force 1999a).
3.7.1.3
FLOODPLAINS
Executive Order 11988, Floodplains Management, directs government agencies to avoid adverse effects
and incompatible development in floodplains. If construction is unavoidable, then the agencies must
ensure the action conforms to applicable floodplain protection standards, and that accepted flood-proofing
and other flood protection measures are applied to the construction.
The only areas on Moody AFB that are designated as Flood Zone A (i.e., 100-year flood areas) are
located east of the installation’s runways and in the Grand Bay Weapons Range. The cantonment area of
Moody AFB is not located within any known floodplains (Federal Emergency Management Agency
1982).
3-46
3.0 Affected Environment: Water Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.8 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Biological resources include living, native, or naturalized plant and animal species and the habitats within
which they occur. Plant associations are referred to as vegetation and animal species are referred to as
wildlife. Habitat can be defined as the resources and conditions present in an area that produces
occupancy of a plant or animal (Hall et al. 1997). Although the existence and preservation of biological
resources are intrinsically valuable, these resources also provide aesthetic, recreational, and
socioeconomic values to society. This analysis focuses on species or vegetation types that are important
to the function of the ecosystem, of special societal importance, or are protected under federal or state law
or statute. For purposes of the EA, these resources are divided into four major categories: vegetation;
wetlands; wildlife; and threatened, endangered, or sensitive plant and animal species.
Vegetation includes all existing terrestrial plant communities with the exception of wetlands or
threatened, endangered, or sensitive plant species. The affected environment for vegetation includes only
those areas potentially subject to ground disturbance.
Wetlands are considered sensitive habitats and are subject to federal regulatory authority under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Executive Order (EO) 11990, Protection of Wetlands.
Jurisdictional wetlands are defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) as those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and
that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions (U.S. Department of the Army [Army] 1987). Areas meeting the federal wetland
definition are under the jurisdiction of the ACOE. Like vegetation, the affected environment for wetlands
includes only those areas potentially subject to ground disturbance.
Wildlife includes all vertebrate animals with the exception of those identified as threatened, endangered,
or sensitive. Wildlife includes fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals.
Threatened, endangered, or sensitive species are defined as those plant and animal species listed as
threatened, endangered, or proposed as such, by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or state fish
and wildlife agencies. The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) protects federally listed threatened and
endangered plant and animal species. Federal species of concern, formerly Category 2 candidate species,
are not protected by law; however, these species could become listed and, therefore, protected at any time.
Their consideration early in the planning process may avoid future conflicts that could otherwise occur.
The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC), Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP), and Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GDNR) through the
Georgia Natural Heritage Program (NHP) also protect state-listed plant and animal species through their
respective state fish and wildlife and administrative codes. Additionally, the Florida Natural Areas
Inventory (FNAI), a non-government organization, maintains databases of state species of concern, many
of which are not afforded legal protection.
The region of influence (ROI) for biological resources for the proposed action and alternative consists of
Moody Air Force Base (AFB) and the affected airspace (i.e., Military Operations Areas [MOAs], Military
Training Routes [MTRs], and the Low Altitude Tactical Navigation [LATN] area).
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
3-47
T-6A Beddown EA
3.8.1
3.8.1.1
Final
Moody AFB and Vicinity
VEGETATION
Southern Georgia and northern Florida are within the Outer Coastal Plain Mixed Forest province. The
flat terrain of this area is dominated by slash pine (Pinus elliottii) forests with a shrub layer of palmetto
(Sabal minor) and gallberry (Ilex glabra) (Bailey et al. 1994).
Moody AFB is located in extreme southern Georgia within the Lower Coastal Plains and Flatwoods
section of the province (Bailey et al. 1994; McNab and Avers 1994). The cantonment area of Moody
AFB is actively landscaped with a variety of native and non-native trees, shrubs, and grasses.
Approximately 50-75 percent of the base is undeveloped and contains a wide variety of habitats including
extensive areas of wetlands. Evergreen shrubs, palmetto, and pond pine (Pinus serotina) dominate the
vegetation surrounding wetlands. Areas which are relatively elevated and well-drained are characterized
by extensive pine flatwoods comprised of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) and slash pine with palmetto,
gallberry, blueberry (Vaccinium spp.), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), greenbriar (Smilax spp.), bracken
fern (Pteridium aquilinum), and muscadine (Vitus rotundifolia) dominating the understory. Hardwoods
and a mixture of pines are found in the higher elevation uplands and include live oak (Quercus
virginiana), water oak (Quercus nigra), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), loblolly (Pinus taeda) and slash
pine. Stands of younger pines are primarily planted loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) (Moody AFB 1995; The
Nature Conservancy [TNC] 1996).
Located in the southern portion of Moody AFB and to the west of Bemiss Field is a unique natural
community known as Dudley’s Hammock (Figure 3.8-1). Being slightly more elevated than the
surrounding swamp or flatwoods, a hammock has a different appearance than the surrounding wetlands
and is relatively dry. The 120-acre Dudley’s hammock is characterized by broad-leaved evergreen trees
including southern magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora), water oak, and live oak, and the rare spruce pine
(Pinus glabra). Understory species include staggerbush (Lyonia sp.), farkleberry (Vaccinium arboreum),
and Elliott’s blueberry (Vaccinium elliottii). Growing on the mature southern magnolias is the rare greenfly orchid (Epidendrum conopseum), the northern-most of the epiphytic orchids. Dudley’s hammock is
one of the few locations in Georgia where green-fly orchids can be found and is probably the only known
and remaining hammock of this kind in Georgia (Air Force 1999u).
Bemiss Field was active during the 1940s as an auxillary airstrip to Moody AFB. The previous asphalt
cover has been removed, so the existing field is predominately composed of perennial grass. The deep
soil compaction resulting from the initial airstrip construction in the 1940s and the current grass mowing
regime has inhibited forest invasion of the majority of Bemiss Field. Where trees have naturally invaded,
their growth is poor. In addition, the GDNR maintains wildlife food plots in the vicinity and immediately
adjacent to Bemiss Field. These 0.5- to 1-acre food plots provide forage for wildlife species.
3.8.1.2
WETLANDS
Characteristic wetland communities on Moody AFB (including Grand Bay Range and Bemiss Field)
include emergent marshes, shrub and hardwood swamps, blackgum-cypress swamps, blackwater creek
floodplains, and Carolina Bays. East of the developed portion of Moody AFB and contained within the
Grand Bay Range is an association of major wetlands known as Carolina Bays, which comprise the Grand
Bay/Banks Lake complex (Figure 3.8-1). Excluding the Okefenokee Swamp, the Grand Bay/Banks Lake
wetland complex is the largest freshwater lake/swamp system in the Coastal Plain of Georgia. Wetlands
in this complex are composed of several broad Carolina Bays and shallow lakes, interconnected by
blackgum-cypress swamp (Moody AFB 1994; TNC 1996).
3-48
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
TN
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,, , ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,
,
, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,,
,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,
,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,
,
,,
,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,
,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,
,,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,
,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,
,,,
,, ,,,,,
the
l
NC
ew
Georgia
N
AL
Be
SC
MOODY
AFB
★
FL
C
ou
Gulf of
Mexico
Atlantic
Ocean
n ty
Ro
ad
12
,,,,, ,
,,,,,, ,
,,,,
125
,
,,
,
125
,,,,,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
Main Base
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,
, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
Bemiss
Field
221
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
Moody Air Force Base Boundary
Wetlands
Sensitive Areas
Dudley’s Hammock
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, Cultural Resources
,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,
Road
LEGEND
Gopher Tortoise
Sensitive Biological and Cultural Resources on Moody AFB
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
0
4,000
Feet
Figure 3.8-1
3-49
T-6A Beddown EA
3.8.1.3
Final
WILDLIFE
The developed portion of the base, the cantonment area, contains habitats and species more typical of
rural and agricultural areas where disturbance has previously occurred. The pine flatwoods and extensive
wetland areas that dominate the undeveloped areas of Moody AFB support a wide variety of fish and
wildlife species. The Grand Bay/Banks Lake complex is the largest blackwater wetland system in
Georgia outside the Okefenokee Swamp. Although not a major waterfowl overwintering area, Grand Bay
does provide resting and overwintering habitat for several species of ducks including ring-necked duck
(Aythya collaris), American wigeon (Anas americana), green-winged teal (Anas crecca), blue-winged teal
(Anas discors), and bufflehead (Bucephala albeola). Wood duck (Aix sponsa) are present in fair numbers
during winter migration, as well as during the summer months (Air Force 1999j). In addition, the wetland
areas support large rookeries of wading birds species including great blue heron (Ardea herodias), little
blue heron (Egretta caerulea), black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax), yellow-crowned night
heron (Nycticorax violaceus), green heron (Butorides virescens), snowy egret (Egretta thula), great egret
(Ardea alba), American bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus), least bittern (Ixobrychus exilis), and white ibis
(Eudocimus albus). Other bird species commonly found at Moody AFB either as breeding residents or
migratory visitors include turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), red-tailed hawk
(Buteo jamaicensis), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), northern
bobwhite (Colinus virginianus), common moorhen (Gallinula choropus), blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata),
Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottus), mourning dove
(Zenaida macroura), summer tanager (Piranga rubra), yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia), and several
species of sparrows and wood warblers (Moody AFB 1994, 1995).
Common mammals found at Moody AFB include Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), eastern
cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), striped skunk (Mephitis
mephitis), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), and
eastern woodrat (Neotoma floridana). The wetland areas support a diverse assemblage of amphibian
species including spring peeper (Hyla crucifer), southern chorus frog (Pseudacris nigrita), eastern newt
(Notophthalmus viridescens), and tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum). Reptiles found on the
installation include common box turtle (Terrapene carolina), ground skink (Scincella lateralis), eastern
glass lizard (Ophisaurus ventralis), southern water snake (Nerodia fasciata), and rough earth snake
(Virginia striatula) (Conant and Collins 1991; Moody AFB 1994, 1995).
3.8.1.4
THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
Although no federally or state-listed plant species are known to occur at Moody AFB, a total of six
threatened, endangered, or sensitive wildlife species listed by the USFWS or State of Georgia are known
to occur at Moody AFB (Table 3.8-1). The majority of these occurrences are from the undeveloped areas
to the east of the runways and primarily in the Grand Bay Range/Bemiss Field area (Moody AFB 1994).
The eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) and gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) are
permanent residents while the bird species are all transient visitors. The southern bald eagle (Haliaeetus
l. leucocephalus) and wood stork (Mycteria americana) may occasionally forage at Moody AFB,
particularly in the northeast portion of the base, near Banks Lake. The peregrine falcon (Falco
peregrinus), recently delisted by the USFWS from the federal list of threatened and endangered species
(USFWS 1999d) but still listed as endangered by the State of Georgia, is known only as an occasional
migratory visitor. The American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) occurs at Moody AFB in wetland
areas and is federally listed as threatened due to its “similarity of appearance” to the American crocodile
(Crocodylus acutus), which is endangered.
3-50
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 3.8-1. Sensitive Wildlife Species Known to Occur at Moody AFB
Common Name
Reptiles
American alligator
Eastern indigo snake
Gopher tortoise
Birds
Peregrine falcon
Southern bald eagle
Wood stork
Scientific Name
Status
Federal
State
Alligator mississippiensis
Drymarchon corais couperi
Gopherus polyphemus
T (S/A)
T
FSC
T
T
Falco peregrinus
Haliaeetus l. leucocephalus
Mycteria americana
T
E
E
E
E
Notes: E = endangered;
FSC = federal species of concern;
S/A = similarity of appearance;
SSC = state species of concern;
T = threatened.
Sources: Moody AFB 1994; TNC 1996; Air Force 1999j.
Indigo snakes are strongly associated with gopher tortoises and rely heavily on gopher tortoise burrows
for nesting and wintering habitat. Both indigo snakes and gopher tortoises are known to occur at Bemiss
Field, primarily at the east end of the east-west runway. Three sightings of indigo snakes were recorded
in the eastern portion of Bemiss Field in 1991. In 1995, the GDNR released two confiscated indigo
snakes in a gopher tortoise colony at Bemiss Field. Subsequent sightings in 1996 of an adult and juvenile
snake at Bemiss Field, suggest that indigo snakes are reproducing in the vicinity of Bemiss Field or
immigration has occurred in this area. There were two known gopher tortoise colonies in the eastern
portion of Bemiss Field in 1996 with an estimated total population size of 109 individuals. This eastern
area has ideal gopher tortoise habitat with sandy soils, herbaceous ground cover, and open tree canopy.
The western portion of Bemiss Field is too overgrown with vegetation and consists of unfavorable soil
conditions to support large numbers of tortoises (Air Force 1996b, USFWS 1996).
The USFWS recently listed the flatwoods salamander (Ambystoma cingulatum) as threatened (USFWS
1999e). Preliminary observations at Moody AFB by TNC indicated that little suitable flatwoods
salamander habitat exists on base and flatwoods salamanders were not found during a 1994 amphibian
survey (TNC 1994). A 1974 record from Okefenokee NWR, approximately 40 miles to the east of
Moody AFB, is the only historical occurrence of flatwoods salamander within the vicinity of the base
(Georgia NHP 1999).
3.8.2
Airspace
Since the lands underlying the affected airspace would not be subjected to any ground-disturbing
activities, vegetation and wetlands found there would not be affected by the proposed actions. Therefore,
plant and wetland communities underlying airspace are not discussed further.
3.8.2.1
MOAS
Wildlife. Wildlife commonly found underlying the affected MOAs are those species typically found in
the oak-hickory-pine forests of the Lower Coastal Plains and Flatwoods section of the Outer Coastal Plain
Mixed Forest and are similar to those already discussed for Moody AFB. Common wildlife species
include common box turtle, eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), eastern diamondback rattlesnake
(Crotalus adamanteus), timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus), American alligator, southern chorus frog,
spring peeper, mourning dove, wild turkey, northern bobwhite, northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis),
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
3-51
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
eastern towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor), Carolina wren, northern
mockingbird, eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis), pine warbler (Dendroica pinus), hairy woodpecker (Picoides
villosus), herons, egrets, numerous species of waterfowl, gray fox, raccoon (Procyon lotor), white-tailed
deer, eastern gray squirrel, eastern cottontail, striped skunk, and bobcat (Lynx rufus).
Threatened and Endangered Species. A total of seven federal endangered, threatened, and candidate
species potentially occur under MOA airspace (Table 3.8-2). Four species are listed as endangered and
three as threatened. The State of Georgia lists a total of 12 species as endangered or threatened: 7
threatened and 5 endangered. The State of Florida lists a total of 12 species as endangered or threatened:
3 endangered and 9 threatened. Moody 3 MOA overlies portions of Alabama; however, since only a
small portion of the MOA overlies Alabama (less than 62 square miles) and since all proposed aircraft
operations within Moody 3 MOA would occur 8,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL), threatened and
endangered species within Alabama are not discussed.
Table 3.8-2. Sensitive Wildlife Species Potentially Occurring in Counties under Affected
Airspace.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Amphibians
Flatwoods salamander
Ambystoma cingulatum
Georgia blind salamander
Haideotriton wallacei
Red Hills salamander
Phaeognathus hubrichti
Status1
Fed/GA/
FL/AL
Moody 1
MOA
Moody 2 N
MOA
T/R/
- /SP
- /T/
SSC/ T/ - /
- /SP
x
x
- /T/
SSC/SP
- /T/
SSC/ SP
T/T/
T/SP
- /T/
SSC/ -/-/
T/ -
x
T/E/
T/SP
-/-/
T/ - /T/
- /SP
E/E/
-/- /Rare/
T/ - /E/
E/SP
T/T/
T/SP
E/E/
T/SP
x
Airspace Unit
Moody 2 S Moody 3 Live Oak
MOA
MOA
MOA
x
x
VR-1065
VR-1066
x
x
x
x
x
x
Reptiles
Alligator snapping turtle
Macroclemys temminckii
Barbour’s map turtle
Graptemys barbouri
Eastern indigo snake
Drymarchon corais couperi
Gopher tortoise
Gopherus polyphemus
Short-tailed snake
Stilosoma extenuatum
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Birds
Bald eagle
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Florida sandhill crane
Grus canadensis pratensis
Gull-billed tern
Sterna nilotica
Kirtland’s warbler
Dendroica kirtlandii
Least tern
Sterna antillarum
Peregrine falcon
Falco peregrinus
Piping plover
Charadrius melodus
Red-cockaded woodpecker
Picoides borealis
3-52
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 3.8-2. Sensitive Wildlife Species Potentially Occurring in Counties under Affected Airspace
(continued)
Common Name
Scientific Name
Birds (cont.)
Southeastern American
kestrel
Falco sparverius paulus
Southeastern snowy plover
Charadrius alexandrinus
tenuirostris
Wood stork
Mycteria americana
Status1
Fed/GA/
FL/AL
-/-/
T/ -
Moody 1
MOA
Moody 2 N
MOA
x
Airspace Unit
Moody 2 S Moody 3 Live Oak
MOA
MOA
MOA
x
x
-/-/
T/ E/E/
E/SP
VR-1065
VR-1066
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Mammals
Choctawhatchee beach
E/ - /
x
mouse
E/ Peromyscus polionotus
allophrys
Florida black bear
-/-/
x
x
x
x
Ursus americanus
T/ floridanus
Gray bat
E/E/
x
x
x
x
x
Myotis grisescens
E/SP
Indiana bat
E/E/
x
Myotis sodalis
E/SP
Round-tailed muskrat
- /T/
x
x
Neofiber alleni
-/St. Andrews beach mouse
E/ - /
x
Peromyscus polionotus
E/ peninsularis
Notes: 1Fed = Federal (USFWS), GA = Georgia, FL = Florida, AL = Alabama.
E = endangered.
R = rare.
SP = state protected.
SSC = state species of concern.
T = threatened.
- = not listed.
Sources: Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 1999; Alabama NHP 1999; FFWCC 1999; FNAI 1999; Georgia
NHP 1999; USFWS 1999a, b, c, g.
Seven species of amphibians and reptiles are listed by the USFWS, Georgia, or Florida as threatened or
endangered and are potentially found under the MOAs. Recently listed by the USFWS as threatened, the
flatwoods salamander is found in fire-maintained, open-canopied, mesic woodlands of longleaf/slash pine
flatwoods and savannas (Palis 1997, USFWS 1999e). The major threats to this salamander are habitat
destruction due to agricultural and silvicultural practices (e.g., clearcutting), fire suppression, and
development (USFWS 1999c). The federally threatened eastern indigo snake is found in creek bottoms,
upland forests, and agricultural fields during the warm, summer months. During winter, indigo snakes
den in xeric sandridge habitat preferred by gopher tortoises. Threats to indigo snakes are similar as those
for the flatwoods salamander but also include over-collecting for the pet trade (USFWS 1999c).
A number of federally or state listed threatened or endangered bird species potentially occur under MOA
airspace: four federally listed (two threatened and two endangered), five listed by Georgia (one
threatened and four endangered), and eight listed by Florida (six threatened and two endangered). The
federally threatened piping plover (Charadrius melodus) would occur beneath Moody 1 and Live Oak
MOAs only as a transient visitor during migration. It is known to be a winter resident along the coast of
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
3-53
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Georgia and prefers areas with expansive sand or mudflats for foraging and sand beaches for roosting
(USFWS 1999c). Bald eagles inhabit inland waterways and estuarine areas throughout the ROI. A total
of nine bald eagle nest sites are known to occur below affected MOA airspace: seven below Moody 1
MOA, one below Moody 3 MOA, and one below Live Oak MOA; there are no known bald eagle nest
sites below Moody 2 MOA (USFWS 1998) (Figures 3.8-2 through 3.8-5). Wood storks nest in wooded
swamps and forage in fresh and brackish wetlands. Seven wood stork nests are known to occur below
affected MOA airspace: five below Moody 1 and two below Live Oak (USFWS 1998) (Figures 3.8-2
through 3.8-5). The endangered red-cockaded woodpecker may be found in low numbers beneath all
MOAs in mature pine forests with low understory vegetation.
Only one federally listed mammal species occurs beneath MOA airspace, the gray bat (Myotis
grisescens). They are found in areas with caves that provide roosting habitat and forage primarily over
water along rivers or lakeshores. Gray bats may potentially be found under all MOA airspace except
Moody 2 North MOA.
3.8.2.2
MTRS
Wildlife. Visual Route (VR)-1065 and VR-1066 overlie areas dominated by slash and longleaf pine
communities; therefore, wildlife found under MTR airspace would be similar to that found at Moody
AFB and under the MOAs.
Threatened and Endangered Species. The majority of the same threatened and endangered species that
are potentially found under MOA airspace are also found under VR airspace (see Table 3.8-2). The
Choctawhatchee beach mouse (Peromyscus polionotus allophrys), although potentially occurring in a
county underlying VR-1065, inhabits coastal beach areas and would not be found under affected airspace.
The Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) has similar habitat requirements as the gray bat discussed previously and
may be found in low numbers under VR-1065.
There are four recorded bald eagle nest sites underlying the eastern portion of VR-1065 and none below
VR-1066. Although a wood stork nest is located approximately 0.5 mile from the edge of VR-1066, near
Nahunta, Georgia there are no known wood stork nest sites below either VR (USFWS 1998) (Figure
3.8-6 and Figure 3.8-7).
3.8.3
3.8.3.1
Transition Training Airports
SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Most of the area at the Southwest Georgia Regional Airport (SGRA) is actively landscaped or paved, with
little natural vegetation or habitat remaining. Areas surrounding the airport consist primarily of rural
residential, agricultural, and forested land. Wildlife species present are those commonly found in urban
and human-disturbed environments. No federally or state-listed plant or animal species are known to
occur in the vicinity of the airport (SGRA 1998).
3.8.3.2
VALDOSTA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Most of the area at the Valdosta Regional Airport is actively landscaped or paved, with little natural
vegetation or habitat remaining. Areas surrounding the airport consist primarily of rural residential,
agricultural, and forested land. Wildlife species present are those commonly found in urban and humandisturbed environments. No federally or state-listed plant or animal species are known to occur on airport
property (Valdosta – Lowndes County Airport Authority 1992).
3-54
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
Fl
i nt
280
41
Moody 1 MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
8,000' –
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
17,999' MSL
17,999' MSL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
8,000' MSL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
Moody 2
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
N/S MOAs
500'/100'
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
AGL –
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
7,999' MSL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Ground Surface
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
✦
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Litt
,,,,,
le
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
✦
✦
✦
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
✦
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
✦
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
DOOLY
Vienna
DOOLY
Pineview
129
SUMTER
75
Chauncey
WHEELER
McRae
280
Scotland
23
WILCOX
441
TELFAIR
319
TELFAIR
Pitts
De Soto
280
CRISP
Hazlehurst
WILCOX
A
341
L.
A
D
Rebecca
RI
Jacksonville
129
JEFF DAVIS
O
FL
Arabi
Warwick
221
Lumber City
Rochelle
●
WHEELER
341
Rhine
Abbeville
Cordele
Leslie
Helena
Milan
er
R iv
280
DODGE
EO
G
IA
RG
BEN HILL
LEE
23
319
Leesburg
Ashburn
TURNER
Denton
Fitzgerald
Sycamore
19
41
Broxton
75
Albany
221
Ocilla
441
WORTH
BACON
COFFEE
Ambrose
82
DOUGHERTY
IRWIN
Sylvester
Putney
Sumner
Alma
TIFT
Poulan
Ty Ty
Nicholls
Douglas
Tifton
●
Enigma
Phillipsburg
82
Baconton
319
Alapaha
Willacoochee
Omega
19
Doerun
MITCHELL
ATKINSON
Sale City
Sale City
Camilla
Pearson
BERRIEN
Norman Park
COLQUITT
82
129
Lenox
221
Funston
Ellenton
Riverside
Moultrie
WARE
Nashville
Sparks
Adel
Pelham
COOK
Ray City
75
Meigs
●
er
Riv
Coolidge
Moody AFB
Morven
221
Barwick
Cairo
CLINCH
125
319
84
41
THOMAS
Thomasville
84
BROOKS
Naylor
Valdosta
221
84
Boston
●
84
Quitman
LOWNDES
G
F
O
R
G
I
A
L
O
R
I
D
A
●
,,,, ,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,
●
LEON
,,,, ,,,,,
319
129
●
●
19
Tallahassee
Lake Park
●
●
Fargo
41
221
JEFFERSON
Jennings
MADISON
Monticello
HAMILTON
75
,,,,,, Moody 1 MOA
,,,,,,
,,,,,, State Boundary
,,
County Boundary
LEGEND
✦
Wood Stork Nest Site
●
Bald Eagle Nest Site
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
1-Mile Buffer Zone Around Bald Eagle Nest Site
Cities and Towns
Wetlands
ECHOLS
441
●
E
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
Homerville
Hahira
Du Pont
Pavo
GRADY
Argyle
129 Lakeland
Cecil
Ochlocknee
84
441
LANIER
41
Berlin
COLUMBIA
Jasper
Statute Miles
0
12
0
12
Nautical Miles
Source: USFWS 1998.
Wood Stork and Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath
and in the Vicinity of Moody 1 MOA
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
Figure 3.8-2
3-55
82
520
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
MOODY 2 NORTH MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
MOODY 2 SOUTH MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Willacoochee 135
441
221
158
31
17,999' MSL
Pearson
129
520
ATKINSON
BERRIEN
76
Moody 1 MOA
23
8,000' –
17,999' MSL
7,999' MSL
A
L.
D
RI
Ground Surface
84
441
89
Ray City
37
Lakeland
129
37
11
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
IA
RG
11
82
EO
G
125
WARE
A
135
Moody 2
N/S MOAs
500'/100'
AGL –
7,999' MSL
O
FL
31
129
4
82
221
Nashville
1
38
Argyle
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
WARE
Homerville
LANIER
187
Du Pont
Moody AFB
CLINCH
31
221
125
Valdosta
11
Naylor
38
129
84
187
LOWNDES
94
31
7
Lake
Park
441
94
11
129
75
G E O R G
I A
F L O R I D
A
Jennings
41
100
25
,,,,,, Moody 2 MOA
,,,,,,
,,,,,, State Boundary
,,
County Boundary
Cities and Towns
Wetlands
Fargo
94
94
441
HAMILTON
129
47
441
3-56
89
ECHOLS
41
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Okefenokee Swamp
COLUMBIA
LEGEND
●
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Bald Eagle Nest Site
Statute Miles
0
1-Mile Buffer Zone Around Bald Eagle Nest Site
6
0
6
Nautical Miles
Source: USFWS 1998.
Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath
and in the Vicinity of Moody 2 North and South MOAs
Figure 3.8-3
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Walter F. George
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Lake
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Riv
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
LEGEND
,,,,,, Moody 3 MOA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 1-Mile Buffer Zone Around Bald Eagle Nest Site
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, State Boundary
0
30
520
82
39
118
45
QUITMAN
520
17,999' MSL
27
131
1
BARBOUR
TERRELL
Dawson
1
431
82
520
Cuthbert
RANDOLPH
332
8,000' MSL
Shellman
Sasser
LEE
A
LA
95
BA
A
O
FL
M
Ground Surface
520
A
EO
G
D
RI
Coleman
IA
RG
CLAY
82
Moody 3 MOA
8,000' – 17,999' MSL
Fort Gaines
37
Abbeville
10
Albany
37
Edison
HENRY
Bluffton
Morgan
CALHOUN
62
Leary
39
Arlington
95
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
DOUGHERTY
62
27
91
1
Haleburg
37
Blakely
134
EARLY
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
Newton ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
62
Damascus
BAKER
Columbia
27
Chattah
Webb
52
1
37
91
o och
ee
MITCHELL
95
Ashford
97
Colquitt
370
91
er
84
Gordon
12
65
MILLER
91
97
HOUSTON
Jakin
311
G
262
E O
A L A B
A M A
F
I
O
R
38
JACKSON
27
Brinson
2
2
112
97
1
84
91
D A
Malone
53
Iron City
A
7
L
Donalsonville
I
R G
53
GRADY
SEMINOLE
Bascom
309
262
DECATUR
Bainbridge
Statute Miles
7
County Boundary
0
Cities and Towns
●
Bald Eagle Nest Site
7
Nautical Miles
Source: USFWS 1998.
Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath
and in the Vicinity of Moody 3 MOA
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
Figure 3.8-4
3-57
75
145
6
Jasper
6
10
90
90
10
10
HAMILTON
lac
With o o c h
6
Madison
53
41
100
ee R
Lee
ive
r
25
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
441
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
unwn
aenenee
129
ann
R iv er
249
White
Springs
Live Oak
41
Su w
75
100
25
90
Five
Points
10
10
51
53
Lake City
COLUMBIA
SUWANNEE
55
Ri
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
a
S u wS
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ee
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
✦
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
e Riv
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ta
S an
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
✦
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
17,999' MSL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
10
221
47
135
vReri
ver
53
MADISON
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
25
41
129
Perry
441
249
27
20
27
Mayo
247
75
20
LAFAYETTE
47
98
27A
19
Branford
55
20
27
51
TAYLOR
18
Fort
White
F
361
er
a nne e Riv
349
8,000' MSL
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
er
DIXIE
Bell
Ground Surface
GILCHRIST
49
IA
RG
EO
G
A
D
RI
O
FL
Gulf of Mexico
27
Su w
L.
A
51
20
358
47
129
349
55
Newberry
19
Live Oak MOA
8,000' – 17,999' MSL
27A
98
Cross City
Trenton
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
26
LEGEND
Live Oak MOA
County Boundary
●
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Bald Eagle Nest Site
1-Mile Buffer Zone Around Bald Eagle Nest Site
Statute Miles
0
7
Cities and Towns
Wetlands
✦
Wood Stork Nest Site
Wood Stork and Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath
and in the Vicinity of Live Oak MOA
3-58
0
7
Nautical Miles
Source: USFWS 1998.
Figure 3.8-5
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
29
Newville
231
84
County Line
Headland
Daleville
Kinsey
Coffee Springs
COVINGTON
Malvern
Hartford
331
BAKER
Slocomb
Eunola
Newton
A L A B
Paxton
Baconton
Georgia
Doerun
19
VR-1065
Sale City
MOODY
★AFB
Camilla
Colquitt
Funston
Atlantic
COLQUITT
Ocean
Gordon
HOUSTON
MITCHELL
MILLER
84
Riverside
Pelham
Jakin
Florida
Gulf of
Mexico
Meigs
231
F
L
O
R
A M A
I
Geneva
Cottonwood
Madrid
Black
Moultrie
Donalsonville
Iron City
Coolidge
Esto
D A
Noma
Laurel Hill
Graceville
Brinson
SEMINOLE
Malone
Campbellton
Ochlocknee
De Funiak
Springs
Whigham
DECATUR
Greenwood
Jacob City
●
●
●
Cairo
Climax
Thomasville
90
Chipley
10
Marianna
10
Grand
Ridge
Boston
●
●
●
84
●
● ●
Attapulgus
Alford
Ponce de Leon
G E O R G
I A
F L O R I
D A
Rive
Sneads
Chattahoochee
Vernon
90
Wausau
331
Valparaiso
Altha
Greensboro
e
Blountstown
Choc
●
19
●
Monticello
●
10
GADSDEN
Ebro
Destin
●
●
319
WASHINGTON
Freeport
●
27
Quincy
●
●
Havana
Gretna
WALTON
●
THOMAS
Barwick
84
Cottondale
Westville
OKALOOSA
Pavo
Bainbridge
Bonifay
Caryville
319
GRADY
Bascom
JACKSON
HOLMES
98
AL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
✦
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
✦
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,, Lake Seminole
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
r
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Tallahassee
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
✦
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
atc h e
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
taw
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
eerr,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
RRiivv
,,,,
✦
,,,,
,,,,
Florala
Lockhart
90
,,,,
,,,,
●
,,,,
,,,,
●
,,,,
,,,,
27
,,,,
,,,,
●
,,,,
,,,,
Avon
Taylor
GENEVA
Samson
SC
Damascus
EARLY
Ashford
NC
Arlington
Columbia
Kinston
TN
Blakely
Dothan
Clayhatchee
Horn Hill
DOUGHERTY
R GIA
Pinckard
Enterprise
84
Andalusia
HENRY
Newton
GEO
Opp
Babbie
DALE
BAMA
Sanford
CALHOUN
Haleburg
New
Brockton
Heath
WORTH
Leary
431
Ozark
COFFEE
Elba
331
ALA
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
,,,,
,,,,
●
,,,,
,,,,
90
Midway
10
●
●
Bristol
Ap
Laguna Beach
Hiland Park
Panama City Beach
Panama City
GULF
Wewahitchka
98
Gulf of Mexico
,,,,
,,,,
●
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
Centerline and Corridor
,,,,,, VR-1065
State Boundary
●
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
1-Mile Buffer Zone Around Bald Eagle Nest Site
27
19
Woodville
,,,,
,,,,
●
,,,,
,,,,
319
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
●
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
●
,,,
St. Marks
,,,,
,,,,
●
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,
98
●
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
● ,,,,
●●
● ,,,,
●
● ,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
● ,,,,
●
●
●
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
●
●
● ,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
319
,,,,
,,,,,Gulf of Mexico
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
●
●
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
●
,,,,
,,,,
Statute Miles
,,,,
,,,,
●
0
15
,,,,
,,,,
WAKULLA
0
Cities and Towns
Wood Stork Nest Site
JEFFERSON
Sopchoppy
LEGEND
Bald Eagle Nest Site
County Boundary
✦
,,,
,,,
●
,,,
,,,
65
,,,,
●
,,,,
,,,,
e
c kon
e
231
LEON
LIBERTY
Oc
hl o
98
al
,,,,
●
,,,,
BAY
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
●
Lynn Haven,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
●
,,,,
,,,,
ach
icol a
River
CALHOUN
Miramar
Beach
TAYLOR
15
Nautical Miles
Source: USFWS 1998.
3-59
Wood Stork and Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath and in the Vicinity of VR-1065
Figure 3.8-6
23
441
LAURENS
Mount
Vernon
Glenwood
TN
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Georgia
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
★
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Atlantic
er
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Ocean
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Oc
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Alta
Gulf
of
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ma
ha
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Mexico
Rive
r
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
✦
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Wi
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ll
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
✦
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Ma
ry s
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
r
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Riv e r
S
Okefenokee Swamp
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
n
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
an
w
u
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
341
319
Eastman
280
Lyons
WHEELER
NC
Collins
Higgston
Manassas
Alamo
221
TOOMBS
Chauncey
DODGE
MONTGOMERY
Helena
Scotland
441
280
23
BRYAN
EVANS
VR-1066
Alston
Uvalda
MOODY
AFB
301
TATTNALL
25
341
319
TELFAIR
FL
●
e
lge
mu
Lumber City
LIBERTY
Glennville
er
Riv
WILCOX
Pembroke
AL
Reidsville
R iv
McRae
Milan
Rhine
Oc o n e e
280
SC
Daisy
Hagan
280
1
Hinesville
Hazlehurst
Gumbranch
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
JEFF DAVIS
129
Graham
341
Jacksonville
APPLING
Walthourville
Baxley
23
BEN HILL
1
319
Denton
84
Surrency
Ludowici
Fitzgerald
Odum
Broxton
Ocilla
441
LONG
221
Jesup
COFFEE
Ambrose
BACON
Alma
301
IRWIN
WAYNE
Douglas
Nicholls
25
Screven
341
●
Enigma
PIERCE
82
Alapaha
Patterson
Willacoochee
84
1
ee River
ooch
ac
BERRIEN
129
23
Blackshear
ATKINSON
Pearson
82
GLYNN
Nahunta
221
82
Nashville
Waycross
Hoboken
BRANTLEY
LANIER
Ray City
84
441
WARE
129 Lakeland
COOK
Argyle
●
Homerville
17
301
Du Pont
Woodbine
Moody AFB
CLINCH
●
95
CAMDEN
125
1
221
41
●
84
Naylor
23
CHARLTON
Homeland
75
Valdosta
Folkston
Kingsland
ECHOLS
,,,,,, VR-1066 Centerline and Corridor
,,,,,,
,,,,,, State Boundary
County Boundary
S
441
✦
●
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Wood Stork Nest Site
23
95
301
Statute Miles
0
Bald Eagle Nest Site
12
1-Mile Buffer Zone Around Bald Eagle Nest Site
0
12
Nautical Miles
Source: USFWS 1998.
Wood Stork and Bald Eagle Nest Sites underneath
and in the Vicinity of VR-1066
3-60
17
Hilliard
LEGEND
Cities and Towns
Wetlands
R I DA
,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,
●
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, 75
GIA
LOWNDES
FLO
Fargo
GEOR
Lake
Park
t.
129
ee R
ive
41
Figure 3.8-7
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
3.8.3.3
Final
TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Tallahassee Regional Airport and the adjacent area supports a number of biotic communities including
sandhill, xeric hammock, upland and bottomland forests, and various types of wetlands. Areas
surrounding the airport consist primarily of rural residential, agricultural, and forested land. Wildlife
species present are those commonly found in urban and human-disturbed environments. A number of
federally and state-listed threatened and endangered species are known to occur on airport property
including gopher tortoise, short-tailed snake, gopher frog (Rana capito), bent golden aster (Pityopsis
flexuosa), and Carolina holly (Ilex ambigua) (City of Tallahassee 1996).
3.8.3.4
LAKE CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
Most of the area at the Lake City Municipal Airport is actively landscaped or paved, with little natural
vegetation or habitat remaining. Areas surrounding the airport consist primarily of rural residential,
agricultural, and forested land. Wildlife species present are those commonly found in urban and humandisturbed environments. No federally or state-listed threatened or endangered species are known to occur
at Lake City Municipal Airport (Lake City Municipal Airport 1999).
3.8.3.5
GAINESVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Most of the area at the Gainesville Regional Airport is actively landscaped or paved, with little natural
vegetation or habitat remaining. Areas surrounding the airport consist primarily of rural residential,
agricultural, and forested land. Wildlife species present are those commonly found in urban and humandisturbed environments. No federally or state-listed plant or animal species are known to occur on airport
property (Gainesville Regional Airport 1999c).
3.0 Affected Environment: Biological Resources
3-61
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.9 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Cultural resources consist of prehistoric and historic districts, sites, structures, artifacts, or any other
physical evidence of human activity considered important to a culture, subculture, or community for
scientific, traditional, religious, or other reasons. Cultural resources can be divided into three major
categories: archaeological resources (prehistoric and historic), architectural resources, and traditional
cultural resources.
Archaeological resources are locations where human activity measurably altered the earth or left deposits
of physical remains (e.g., tools, arrowheads, or bottles). “Prehistoric” refers to resources that predate the
advent of written records in a region. These resources can range from a scatter composed of a few
artifacts to village sites and rock art. “Historic” refers to resources that postdate the advent of written
records in a region. Archaeological resources can include campsites, roads, fences, trails, dumps,
battlegrounds, mines, and a variety of other features. Architectural resources include standing buildings,
dams, canals, bridges, and other structures of historic or aesthetic significance. Architectural resources
generally must be more than 50 years old to be considered for protection under existing cultural resource
laws. However, more recent structures, such as Cold War era military buildings, may warrant protection
if they have the potential to be historically significant structures. Architectural resources must also
possess integrity (its important historic features must be present and recognizable). Traditional cultural
resources can include archaeological resources, buildings, neighborhoods, prominent topographic
features, habitats, plants, animals, and minerals that Native Americans or other groups consider essential
for the continuance of traditional cultures.
Only significant cultural resources, known or unknown, warrant consideration with regard to adverse
impacts resulting from a proposed action. To be considered significant, archaeological or architectural
resources must meet one or more criteria as defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) 60.4 for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
There are no legally established criteria for assessing the importance of a traditional cultural resource.
These criteria must be established primarily through consultation with Native Americans, in accordance
with the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act (1966). When applicable, consultation
with other affected groups provides the means to establish the importance of their traditional resources.
This can also be accomplished using 36 CFR 60.4 and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Guidelines. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990) defines the procedures
for consultation and treatment of Native American burials and burial artifacts.
Resources addressed at Moody Air Force Base (AFB) include archaeological, architectural, and
traditional cultural resources. Within the affected airspace, aircraft operations associated with the
proposed action would largely affect only airspace and airspace-related resources. However, aircraft
overflights do have the potential to affect existing or potentially occurring archaeological, architectural, or
traditional resources. The noise and visual presence from such overflights may have indirect impacts on
cultural resources; the significance of such impacts is based on the integrity and characteristics of the
setting. In contrast, direct impacts (e.g., ground disturbance) would not result from overflights.
Therefore, this environmental assessment (EA) examines only those resources whose setting might be
affected, including NRHP-listed or eligible archaeological and architectural resources (e.g., historic
structures).
3.0 Affected Environment: Cultural Resources
3-63
T-6A Beddown EA
3.9.1
3.9.1.1
Final
Moody AFB and Vicinity
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The following information is based on the Cultural Resource Management Plan (CRMP) for Moody AFB,
which summarized recent archaeological surveys performed at the installation (Moody AFB 1997b). A
total of 21 sites and 39 isolated finds have been identified at the base (see Figure 3.8-1). Of the 21 sites
identified, 11 contained only prehistoric materials, 2 contained only historic materials, and 8 had evidence
of both prehistoric and historic materials. Five of the sites are potentially eligible for inclusion in the
NRHP. The 39 isolated artifact findings included 32 that were prehistoric in nature, 4 of a historic nature,
and 3 that were both prehistoric and historic in nature. However, due to the lack of cultural materials and
research potential, none of these artifact findings were determined eligible. The Georgia State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) has concurred with the site determinations, and the base currently maintains
the five potentially eligible sites by avoidance (Air Force 1998a).
3.9.1.2
ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES
The majority of development at Moody AFB occurred after 1951. The installation was originally a
satellite field and was not extensively developed. Few structures built during the World War II period
still exist. Those that remain standing from this period have been significantly modified in accordance
with installation mission changes (Moody AFB 1997b).
An architectural reconnaissance survey identified 15 structures that were at least 50 years old (Table
3.9-1). These structures were built in 1941 and include five buildings, three airplane hangars, two
ammunition storehouses, a utility vault, two heating facility buildings, a water tower, and a water system
complex (Army 1999e). Only the water tower was recommended for historic preservation. Because of
significant modifications, the remaining buildings and facilities associated with the World War II period
lacked architectural characteristics that would link them to this historic era (U.S. Department of the Army
[Army] 1999).
Table 3.9-1. Inventory of Potentially Historic Structures at Moody AFB
Building Number
Description
NRHP Potential
609
618
701
718
723
725
733
912
913
934
1000
1004
1005
1100
1106
Hangar
Water Tower
Hangar
Hangar
Utility Vault
Heating Facility Building
Heating Facility Building
Water System Complex
Building
Building
Building
Building
Building
Ammunition Storehouse
Ammunition Storehouse
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Source: Army 1999.
The CRMP also discussed Cold War era structures. An inventory was conducted of 137 structures
selected on the importance of the resource to the installation, the installation’s role in the Cold War, and
3-64
3.0 Affected Environment: Cultural Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
the importance of the resource within the national context of the Cold War. No buildings or structures on
Moody AFB were deemed significant to the Cold War era (Moody AFB 1997b). Consultations with the
Georgia SHPO are ongoing regarding the recommendations of the CRMP and a historic building survey
is currently in progress to complete this consultation.
3.9.1.3
TRADITIONAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Seventeen known American Indian traditional cultural resource sites are located throughout the State of
Georgia (Moody AFB 1997b). However, none of these sites are located in or near Lowndes or Lanier
Counties.
3.9.2
Airspace
There has been no formal record search to determine the definite number or type of cultural resources in
these areas. Estimates of cultural resources underlying the affected airspace gathered from state
archaeological files could number in the thousands. The National Register Information System lists a
total of 95 NRHP-listed structures underlying the affected airspace (National Park Service 1999). Moody
1 MOA has the largest number of NRHP-listed properties with 64, followed by Live Oak MOA with 11,
Moody 3 MOA with 10, VR-1065 with 4, and VR-1066 and Moody 2 North MOA both with 3 structures;
no listed properties occur under Moody 2 South MOA. Seventeen known American Indian traditional
cultural resource sites are located throughout the State of Georgia (Moody AFB 1997b). However, none
of these sites are located under or near any of the affected airspace.
3.9.3
3.9.3.1
Transition Training Airports
SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL AIRPORT
The Georgia Department of Parks, Historical Division, has found no known cultural resource sites that are
eligible for listing on the NRHP located on or in the vicinity of the Southwest Georgia Regional Airport
(SGRA) (SGRA 1998). No Native American reservations are located near SGRA. In addition, no
traditional or sacred resources of interest to Native Americans have been identified within the vicinity of
the airport.
3.9.3.2
VALDOSTA REGIONAL AIRPORT
No significant archaeological, historical, or traditional cultural resources are known from the Valdosta
Regional Airport or in the immediate vicinity (Valdosta – Lowndes County Airport Authority 1992). No
Native American reservations are located near Valdosta Regional Airport. In addition, no traditional or
sacred resources of interest to Native Americans have been identified within the vicinity of the airport.
3.9.3.3
TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
No significant archaeological, prehistorical, or historical resources are known from the Tallahassee
Regional Airport or vicinity. No Native American reservations are located near Tallahassee Regional
Airport. In addition, no traditional or sacred resources of interest to Native Americans have been
identified within the vicinity of the airport (City of Tallahassee 1996).
3.9.3.4
LAKE CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
There are no recorded archaeological or historical cultural resource sites within the project area. In
addition, the Florida State Historic Preservation Officer states that it is unlikely that any significant
unrecorded cultural resource site exists in the vicinity of the airport (City of Lake City 1996). No Native
3.0 Affected Environment: Cultural Resources
3-65
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
American reservations are located near Lake City Municipal Airport. In addition, no traditional or sacred
resources of interest to Native Americans have been identified within the vicinity of the airport.
3.9.3.5
GAINESVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
No significant archaeological, prehistorical, or historical resources are known from the Gainesville
Regional Airport or vicinity. No Native American reservations are located near Gainesville Regional
Airport. In addition, no traditional or sacred resources of interest to Native Americans have been
identified within the vicinity of the airport (Gainesville Regional Airport 1999c).
3-66
3.0 Affected Environment: Cultural Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.10 SOCIOECONOMICS
Socioeconomics comprise the basic attributes of population and economic activity within a particular area
or region of influence (ROI) and typically encompasses population, employment and income, and
industrial/commercial growth. To illustrate local “baseline” conditions, socioeconomic data provided in
this section consist primarily of county level data for Moody Air Force Base (AFB) and vicinity (i.e.,
Lowndes, Lanier, Berrien, and Cook Counties). For socioeconomics, “baseline” information is based on
current data from 1990 census data, 1998 population estimates, and 1999 state and county data. In
addition, this section also presents the best currently available information for education, housing, health
services, municipal services, and utilities for the Moody AFB ROI. The ROI does not include areas in the
vicinity of affected airspace or transition training airports because no change to existing socioeconomic
conditions would occur in these areas as a result of implementing the proposed action or alternative.
3.10.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity
3.10.1.1 POPULATION
Between 1980 and 1990, population within the State of Georgia grew 18.6 percent (Table 3.10-1).
Overall population in the ROI increased by about 8,500 people during this period, or 8.4 percent (Georgia
Institute of Technology 1999; U.S. Bureau of the Census [USBC] 1999a).
Since 1990 the rate of population growth at the state and county levels has increased substantially. The
estimated 1998 population in the ROI increased by over 14,000 people, or approximately 13 percent.
Previously stable population trends in Lanier, Berrien, and Cook Counties have changed notably, with
growth since 1990 estimated at 26, 15, and 12 percent, respectively. This compares to state growth of 18
percent and growth within Lowndes County of 12 percent during the same period (USBC 1999a).
Table 3.10-1. Population Trends within the Moody AFB ROI and State of Georgia
Area
ROI
Georgia
1980 Census
1990 Census
% Change
1998 Estimate
% Change
100,641
5,463,105
109,121
6,478,216
8.4
18.6
123,581
7,642,207
13.3
18.0
Sources: Georgia Institute of Technology 1999; USBC 1999a.
The predominant population within the Moody AFB ROI is composed primarily of white and African
American residents (64 and 32 percent, respectively). The Hispanic and combined “Other” populations
each comprise less than 2 percent of the population. These regional demographics are reflective of
Georgia as a whole (Oregon State University 1999).
The baseline total number of active duty military personnel, civilians, retirees, and dependants in the ROI
is approximately 26,700 (Air Force 1999i). This includes 9,650 active duty and dependents, 2,050
civilian employees and dependents, and 15,000 military retirees and dependents. Moody AFB has a
baseline total of 3,306 personnel (Table 3.10-2). Of this amount, 2,766 (84 percent) are full-time military
and 540 (16 percent) are civilians and contractors.
3.0 Affected Environment: Socioeconomics
3-67
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 3.10-2. Baseline Manpower Summary for Moody AFB
Baseline/No-Action Alternative
(FY01/2)
Personnel
Officer
Enlisted
Civilian
Contractor
Total
435
2,331
396
144
3,306
Source: Air Force 1999a.
3.10.1.2 EMPLOYMENT
The economy in the Moody AFB ROI prior to the 1970s was based primarily on agricultural and forest
products, with some light industrial activities. The economy subsequently diversified with the addition of
Valdosta State College and continued importance of Moody AFB. Over the past 30 years, the local
economy has experienced a substantial shift toward retail trade, manufacturing, and distribution.
Employment in the Moody AFB ROI is dominated by retail trade (30.8 percent), services (28.4 percent),
and manufacturing (19.8 percent). Together, these industries account for almost 80 percent of total
employment in the area. Agricultural services and forestry account for less than 1 percent of total
employment (USBC 1999b). Moody AFB is the largest employer in the ROI, followed by the South
Georgia Medical Center, Valdosta State University, and the city and county school systems
(Valdostaga.com 1999).
Average unemployment numbers in the ROI are consistent with the State of Georgia (Table 3.10-3). As
of April 1999, the Georgia unemployment rate was 3.5 percent, while the unemployment rate in the ROI
was 3.8 percent. This compares to a rate of 4.1 percent for the entire United States. The unemployment
rate for Lowndes County is one of the lowest in the state, at 2.9 percent. The unemployment rate for the
ROI has held steady over the past year (Georgia Department of Labor 1999).
Table 3.10-3. Unemployment Rates within the Moody AFB ROI and State of Georgia
Area
ROI
Georgia
Labor
Force
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate
April 1999 (%)
Unemployment Rate
May 1998 (%)
64,253
4,054,009
61,817
3,912,838
2,436
141,171
3.8
3.5
3.9
4.0
Source: Georgia Department of Labor 1999.
The civilian labor force in the ROI totaled 64,253 as of April 1999. Of this amount, the majority (70
percent) is located in Lowndes County. Employment within the ROI represents 1.6 percent of the
statewide labor force (Georgia Department of Labor 1999).
Secondary (i.e., indirect) employment associated with base operations includes jobs generated in
surrounding communities to support the needs of base personnel and their dependents. Multipliers have
been established that can be applied to staffing levels at military installations to estimate the total number
of jobs created by continuing base operations (Logistics Management Institute 1995). Different personnel
categories are assigned different multipliers: 0.29 for officers, 0.13 for enlisted personnel, and 0.43 for
civilian (including contractor) staffing. Applying these multipliers to baseline staffing levels at Moody
AFB (see Table 3.10-2), it is estimated that approximately 661 jobs in the region are indirectly associated
with the base.
3-68
3.0 Affected Environment: Socioeconomics
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.10.1.3 EARNINGS
While employment levels have held relatively steady, the regional economy has continued to expand.
Total earnings in the ROI in 1996 were approximately $807 million, a 5.4 percent increase from the
previous year. The greatest earnings were in manufacturing ($236 million or 29 percent of earnings) and
services ($216 million or 27 percent of earnings). These two sectors, along with retail trade ($143 million
or 18 percent of earnings) equate to nearly three-quarters of the regional economy (USBC 1999b).
In 1997, the ROI had a per capita personal income (PCPI) of $18,783 (Table 3.10-4). This PCPI was 79
percent of the state average ($23,882), and 74 percent of the national average ($25,298). The 1997 PCPI
reflected an annual increase of 5.9 percent from 1996. In 1987, the PCPI of the ROI was $11,260. This
represents a 10-year increase of 67 percent, with an average annual growth rate of 5.4 percent. The
average annual growth rate during this same period was 5.1 percent for the state and 4.7 percent for the
nation (Bureau of Economic Analysis [BEA] 1999).
Table 3.10-4. Per Capita Personal Income and Total Personal Income within the
Moody AFB ROI and State of Georgia
PCPI
TPI (in billions)
Region
1987
1996
1997
% Change
(96-97)
1987
1996
1997
% Change
(96-97)
ROI
Georgia
$11,260
$14,562
$17,737
$22,897
$18,783
$23,882
5.9
4.3
$1.1
$90.4
$2.2
$167.9
$2.3
$178.9
4.5
6.6
Source: BEA 1999.
In 1997, the total personal income (TPI) in the ROI was approximately $2.3 billion. This accounted for
1.3 percent of the state total. The 1997 TPI reflected an increase of 4.5 percent from 1996. The change in
TPI for the same period at the state and national level was 6.6 and 5.7 percent, respectively. In 1987, the
TPI in the ROI was approximately $1.1 billion, an increase of 109 percent and an average annual growth
rate of 7.2 percent. The state and national average annual growth rate for this period was 7.1 and 5.8
percent, respectively (BEA 1999).
The percentage of people below the poverty level in 1998 was 22 percent in the ROI, 16.8 in Georgia, and
15.1 in the nation. In 1988 the percentage of people below the poverty line was 20 percent in the ROI, 15
percent in the state, and 13 percent in the nation (Georgia Department of Community Affairs 1999).
About $163 million was paid to federal civilian and military employees in Lowndes, Lanier, Berrien, and
Cook Counties in 1997; in the same year there were 5,554 federal civilian and military jobs. Therefore,
federal civilian and military employees in the four affected counties earned an average of $29,348 in
1997. Without adjusting for inflation, this average earnings level can be applied to the number of
baseline Moody AFB personnel (3,306) to derive a total baseline payroll disbursement estimate of $97
million (Oregon State University 1999).
In general, a multiplier of 1.95 is applied to payroll disbursements to project the total indirect economic
benefit associated with economic activity of a given entity (i.e., for every payroll dollar distributed, $1.95
is spent in the local economy). Applying this multiplier to payroll disbursements estimated for Moody
AFB, the cumulative (i.e., direct plus indirect) annual economic benefit resulting from ongoing base
operations is approximately $189 million.
3.0 Affected Environment: Socioeconomics
3-69
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.10.1.4 EDUCATION
Student enrollment and student/teacher ratios within the ROI are shown in Table 3.10-5. Approximately
68 percent of the students are enrolled in either the Valdosta City or Lowndes County School Districts;
the remainder are spread throughout the Lanier, Berrien, and Cook County School Districts. The average
student/teacher ratio in the ROI is 16.6. In addition to elementary, middle, and high schools, Valdosta
State University is also located in the ROI. The University has an enrollment of approximately 8,600 and
offers classes at Moody AFB.
Table 3.10-5. Estimated Baseline School District Characteristics within the
Moody AFB ROI
ROI
Total Students
Total Teachers
Student/Teacher Ratio
21,975
1,325
16.6
Source: Air Force 1999a.
The State of Georgia allocated approximately $8.1 billion in local, state, and federal funds (Table 3.10-6)
and had a total enrollment of 1,346,761 students (U.S. Department of Education 1999a, b). This equates
to approximately $6,000 per student in combined funding. Multiplying this amount by the number of
enrolled students in the ROI gives an annual allocation of approximately $131.9 million (Table 3.10-7).
Table 3.10-6. Revenues for Georgia Public Schools (in thousands)
Local
State
Federal
Total
$3,206,675
$4,366,411
$556,165
$8,129,251
Source: U.S. Department of Education 1999b.
Table 3.10-7. Combined Government Funding of Moody AFB ROI Schools
ROI
Total Students
Funding @ $6,000 per Student (in millions)
21,975
$131.9
Source: Air Force 1999a.
3.10.1.5 HOUSING
In 1990 (the last year for which these data are available), the number of housing units in the ROI was
42,306. The majority of these (68 percent) were located in Lowndes County. Owner-occupied housing
comprised 58 percent of the units, while renters occupied 32 percent of the housing stock; there was a
vacancy rate of 10 percent within the ROI (USBC 1999c).
As of April 1999, there were 712 homes for sale in the ROI and 641 available for rent. Approximately
one-quarter of the available rentals were houses, with the remainder consisting of apartments and
complexes. The average rental for a three-bedroom unit is $400 to $600; the average cost of a threebedroom home is about $98,000 (Moody AFB 1999a).
Moody AFB has 303 family housing units; 274 are dedicated to enlisted personnel and the remainder are
for officers. There are also eight dormitories on base, housing 1,000 personnel. There is a 99 percent
occupancy rate for base housing and a 93 percent occupancy rate for the dormitories. The waiting list for
base housing ranges from 6 months to 3 years, depending on rank and housing type (i.e., number of
3-70
3.0 Affected Environment: Socioeconomics
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
bedrooms). Community housing availability is currently not a problem for base personnel (Moody AFB
1999a).
3.10.1.6 HEALTH SERVICES
The ROI has two hospitals (not including the Moody AFB clinic) with a total of 359 beds. There is also a
psychiatric hospital with 709 beds. Serving these facilities are 125 doctors and 34 dentists. These health
services and facilities are expected to be able to support an increase in population within the ROI
(Georgia Department of Community Affairs 1999).
3.10.1.7 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
Fire Protection. The Moody AFB Fire Protection Program includes fixed facility systems, a central base
fire alarm system, a water distribution system, a maintenance program, and a fire prevention program.
Moody AFB operates one fire station, located on the flightline, to combat aircraft and structural fires.
The fire fighting capability is provided by one P-23 tank truck (3,000 gallons) and two P-19 tank trucks
(1,000 gallons) for fighting aircraft fires, and one P-22 pumper truck with 1,000 gallons per minute (gpm)
capacity and one P-24 pumper truck with 1,000 gpm for combating structural fires. Moody AFB has
authorization for one P-10 rescue truck. The base has mutual fire fighting support agreements with
Valdosta and neighboring communities.
Electricity. Georgia Power Company and Colquitt Electric Membership Corporation provide electrical
services in the area. Colquitt provides service to Moody AFB. With the exception of Military Family
Housing, all of the electrical distribution system was updated by a project completed in fiscal year 1988
(FY88). The electrical infrastructure system at Moody AFB is in excellent condition and the existing
system could support moderate growth on the installation (Air Force 1999k).
Natural Gas. Natural gas for Moody AFB is purchased through two accounts from Atlanta Gas and Light
Company. One account covers the portion of the base east of Bemiss Road and the other to the west. The
system enters the base through two separate stations located on either side of Bemiss Road south of the
main gate. Natural gas capacity at the base is expected to be adequate to support future developments
(Moody AFB 1999k).
Water Service. Treated, potable water for the main cantonment and family housing areas is provided by
three on-base government owned wells that have a pumping capacity of approximately 94,800 gallons per
hour and a production capacity of approximately 1.5 million gallons per day. Water is distributed
throughout the cantonment area via 6- to 12-inch distribution lines. Water is treated on-base and stored in
above-ground storage tanks. In addition to the main three potable supply wells, Moody AFB has seven
additional wells throughout the base providing both potable and non-potable water for fire protection, air
conditioning, recreation, and personnel support in more isolated areas, such as the Munitions Storage
Area and Air Control Squadron area. According to the Civil Engineering Squadron, the water system is
capable of supporting moderate growth on the installation (Air Force 1999k).
Stormwater. Stormwater runoff is channeled off the base to Grand Bay Creek to the east and Beatty
Branch to the northwest. There are approximately 211,000 linear feet of storm drainage lines on base
composed of several materials, such as concrete, reinforced concrete, corrugated metal, vitrified clay,
terra cotta, and cast iron (Air Force 1999k).
Sewer Service. Moody AFB has its own wastewater treatment plant which was upgraded in 1995. The
treatment plant treats both domestic and industrial wastewater discharge. The base maintains a National
3.0 Affected Environment: Socioeconomics
3-71
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the GDNR, Environmental Pollution
Division. The permit allows effluent discharge at an average rate of 750,000 gallons per day and a
maximum discharge rate of 1,125,000 gallons per day (Air Force 1999w). The maximum discharge rate
is equivalent to the capacity of the treatment plant. Treatment plant personnel have indicated that there is
currently adequate capacity for treatment of wastewater generated on-base. The base maintains
approximately 131,000 linear feet of sanitary sewer lines connecting the generating sources with the
treatment plant. In addition, the base has seven separate septic systems (Air Force 1999w).
Solid Waste. The Pecan Row Municipal Solid Waste Landfill provides solid waste services to the base
and the Valdosta area and has a life expectancy of more than 15 years (i.e., capacity may be reached by
2015). The current contribution from Moody AFB to this landfill is considered “low” by the landfill
manager. Although capacity at the landfill is currently adequate, plans are to expand the landfill should
the need arise; permits have already been obtained to acquire land adjacent to the landfill (Pecan Row
Municipal Solid Waste Landfill 1999). In accordance with AFI 32-7080, Pollution Prevention Program,
Moody AFB is required to recycle as much of the base’s solid waste stream as possible and will conduct
an annual review to identify source reduction potential and additional recyclable materials.
3-72
3.0 Affected Environment: Socioeconomics
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
In 1994, Executive Order (EO) 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority and
Low-Income Populations (Environmental Justice), was issued to focus the attention of federal agencies on
human health and environmental conditions in minority and low-income communities. This EO was also
established to ensure that disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on
these communities are identified and addressed. In accordance with the Interim Guide for Environmental
Justice Analysis with the Environmental Impact Analysis Process (Air Force 1997b), the Environmental
Justice analysis focuses on the distribution of race and poverty status in areas potentially affected by
implementation of a proposed action.
For the purpose of this analysis, minority and low-income populations are defined as:
•
Minority Populations: Persons of Hispanic origin of any race, Blacks, American Indians, Eskimos,
Aleuts, Asians, or Pacific Islanders.
•
Low-Income Populations: Persons living below the poverty level, based on a total annual income
of $12,674 for a family of four persons as reported in the 1990 census.
Estimates of these two population categories were developed based on data from the 1990 Census of
Population and Housing (U.S. Bureau of the Census [USBC] 1993). Although these census data are now
eight years old, they represent the most complete, detailed, and accurate statistics available addressing
population distribution and income in rural areas. Further, there are no indications that regional trends
since 1990 have altered general population characteristics.
In 1997, EO 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (Protection
of Children), was issued to ensure the protection of children. Socioeconomic data specific to the
distribution of population by age and the proximity of youth-related developments (e.g., day care centers
and schools) are used to analyze potentially incompatible activities associated with a proposed action.
Data generally used for the Protection of Children analysis are collected from the 1990 Census of
Population and Housing (USBC 1993).
The region of influence (ROI) is defined separately for each element of the proposed action. For the
affected airspace, each airspace unit is made up of all the block groups directly beneath each airspace
unit. A block group is a basic unit of estimated population used by the USBC to define areas. Block
groups are composed of clusters of one to four city blocks, generally 550 housing units. In rural areas,
where population densities are smaller, block groups are larger areas defined by physical features such as
rivers, political boundaries (such as city limits or county lines), and other reasonable criteria.
For the purposes of analysis in this environmental assessment (EA) there are three ROIs: Moody AFB
and vicinity, areas underlying the affected airspace (i.e., Military Operations Areas [MOAs] and Military
Training Routes [MTRs]), and the areas in the immediate vicinity of the five transition training airports.
3.11.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity
Approximately 31 percent of the total population in the Moody AFB ROI is composed of minorities
(Table 3.11-1). In the ROI the percent of population living below poverty level is about 20 percent. This
is higher than the national and Georgia rates of 13 and 14.2 percent, respectively (USBC 1993).
3.0 Affected Environment: Environmental Justice
3-73
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 3.11-1. Environmental Justice Data for the Moody AFB ROI (1990)
Geographic
Area
Total
Population
Lowndes County
Lanier County
Berrien County
Cook County
Total
75,981
5,531
14,153
13,456
109,121
Minority Populations
Total
% of Total
Number
Population
25,952
1,516
1,887
4,337
33,692
Low-Income Populations
Total
% of Total
Number
Population
34.2
27.4
13.3
32.2
30.9
14,245
1,412
2,674
2,973
21,304
18.7
25.5
18.9
22.1
19.5
Source: USBC 1993.
As of 1990, the total number of children under the age of 18 living in the Moody AFB ROI was 30,491,
or approximately 28 percent of the total population (Table 3.11-2) In accordance with city and county
planning guidance, no youth-specific facilities (e.g., schools or day care centers) have been established or
are currently in operation in the area surrounding Moody AFB. Further, no identified Environmental
Restoration Plan (ERP) sites on base are located so that they pose a health risk.
Table 3.11-2. Number of Children in the Moody AFB ROI (1990)
Geographic Area
Lowndes County
Lanier County
Berrien County
Cook County
Total
Total Population
Number of Children
% of Total Population
75,981
5,531
14,153
13,456
109,121
21,107
1,586
3,929
3,869
30,491
27.8
28.7
27.8
28.8
27.9
Source: USBC 1993.
3.11.2 Airspace
Table 3.11-3 presents the 1990 census data for minority and low-income populations located under
affected airspace. In order to more accurately present the data, the analysis consists of block group level
data located underneath or intersecting each airspace. Approximately 31 percent of the population under
the affected airspace associated with the proposed action consists of minority populations. Low-income
populations comprise 22.5 percent of the population under the affected airspace.
Table 3.11-3. Environmental Justice Data for Affected Airspace (1990)
Airspace
Total
Population
Moody 1 MOA
Moody 2 MOA (N/S)
Moody 3 MOA
Live Oak MOA
VR 1065
VR 1066
Total
302,909
8,708
33,957
53,381
40,089
45,563
484,607
Minority Populations
Total
% of Total
Number
Population
98,193
2,643
15,533
8,623
14,119
10,185
149,296
32.4
30.4
45.7
16.2
35.2
22.4
30.8
Low-Income Populations
Total
% of Total
Number
Population
67,857
2,030
9,811
10,132
9,057
10,036
108,923
22.4
23.3
28.9
19.0
22.6
22.0
22.5
Source: USBC 1993.
Table 3.11-4 summarizes data for population of children located underneath the affected airspace. As of
1990, the total number of children under the age of 18 living under affected airspace units was 137,663,
or approximately 28.4 percent of the total population.
3-74
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 3.11-4. Number of Children underneath Affected Airspace (1990)
Airspace
Total Population
Number of Children
% of Total Population
Moody 1 MOA
Moody 2 MOA (N/S)
Moody 3 MOA
Live Oak MOA
VR 1065
VR 1066
Total
302,909
8,708
33,957
53,381
40,089
45,563
484,607
87,699
267
9, 978
14,723
11,549
13,447
137,663
29.0
3.1
29.4
27.6
28.8
30.0
28.4
Source: USBC 1993.
3.11.3 Transition Training Airports
The proposed action includes five civilian airports that would be used for transition training by the T-6A
student pilots. These airports are located in Albany and Valdosta, Georgia; and Gainesville, Lake City,
and Tallahassee, Florida. Table 3.11-5 presents the 1990 census data for minority and low-income
populations and Table 3.11-6 presents the population of children in cities where the proposed transition
training airports are located.
Table 3.11-5. Environmental Justice Data for Proposed Transition Training
Airport Cities
City/State
Georgia
Albany, Georgia
Valdosta, Georgia
Florida
Tallahassee, Florida
Gainesville, Florida
Lake City, Florida
Total
Population
Minority Populations
% of Total
Number
Population
6,478,216
78,122
39,806
12,937,926
124,773
84,770
10,005
1,878,068
43,578
17,838
2,188,641
39,633
22,584
3,995
Low-Income Populations
Total
% of Total
Number
Population
29.0
55.8
44.8
16.9
31.8
26.6
39.9
923,085
21,011
8,947
1,616,262
25,518
19,860
2,352
14.2
26.9
22.5
12.5
20.5
23.4
23.5
Source: USBC 1993.
Table 3.11-6. Number of Children in Proposed Transition Training Airport Cities
City/State
Georgia
Albany, Georgia
Valdosta, Georgia
Florida
Tallahassee, Florida
Gainesville, Florida
Lake City, Florida
Total Population
Number of Children
% of Total Population
6,478,216
78,122
39,806
12,937,926
124,773
84,770
10,005
1,727,303
24,091
11,177
2,866,237
23,685
16,598
2,551
26.7
30.8
28.1
22.2
19.0
19.6
25.5
Source: USBC 1993.
3.11.3.1 SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Approximately 56 percent of the population of Albany is composed of minorities, consisting mostly of
African-American residents. This is almost twice that of the State of Georgia (29 percent). Low-income
populations comprise approximately 27 percent. As of 1990, the total number of children under the age
3.0 Affected Environment: Environmental Justice
3-75
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
of 18 living in Albany was 24,091, or approximately 31 percent of the total population, which is similar to
Georgia (27 percent).
3.11.3.2 VALDOSTA REGIONAL AIRPORT
The percentage of minority residents in Valdosta is approximately 45 percent, higher than the state
estimate of 29 percent. The percentage of low-income populations and children under the age of 18 living
in Valdosta is 22.5 and 28.1 percent, respectively.
3.11.3.3 TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
The minority population in the City of Tallahassee is 31.8 percent of the total population. Approximately
21 percent are living below the poverty level. The total number of children under the age of 18 living in
Tallahassee is 23,685, or 19 percent.
3.11.3.4 LAKE CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
Approximately 40 percent of the population of Lake City is composed of minorities. This is more than
twice that of the State of Florida (17 percent). The percentage of low-income populations in Lake City
(23.5 percent) is almost twice that of Florida (12.5 percent). The total number of children under the age
of 18 living in Lake City is 2,551, or approximately 26 percent of the total population.
3.11.3.5 GAINESVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Approximately 27 percent of the population of the City of Gainesville is composed of minorities, higher
than the State of Florida (17 percent). The percentage of low-income populations and children under the
age of 18 in Gainesville are approximately 23 and 20 percent, respectively. The percentage of lowincome populations is approximately double that of Florida (12 percent) whereas the percentage of
children in Gainesville (20 percent) is slightly less than that of Florida (22 percent).
3-76
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.12 LAND USE
Land use generally refers to human modification of land, often for residential or economic purposes. It
also refers to the use of land for preservation or protection of natural resources such as wildlife habitat,
vegetation, or unique features. Human land uses include residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural,
and recreation. Unique natural features are often designated as national or state parks, forests, wilderness
areas, or wildlife refuges.
Attributes of land use include general land use and ownership, land management plans, and special use
areas. Land ownership is a categorization of land according to type of owner. The major land ownership
categories include federal, state, American Indian, and private. Federal lands are further described by the
managing agency, which may include the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), United
States Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, or the Department of Defense (DoD). Land uses are
frequently regulated by management plans, policies, ordinances, and regulations that determine the types
of activities that are allowed or that protect specially designated or environmentally sensitive uses.
Special use land management areas (SULMAs) are identified by federal and state agencies as being
worthy of more rigorous management.
3.12.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity
3.12.1.1 REGIONAL LAND USE
Moody Air Force Base (AFB) occupies 11,402 acres of federally owned land in Lowndes and Lanier
Counties in south-central Georgia. The installation is divided into the main base (5,039 acres) and the
Grand Bay Range (5,874 acres); an additional 489 acres is located at the Grassy Pond Recreational Annex
approximately 25 miles south of the base. Land use in the vicinity of the installation consists of mostly
undeveloped wetlands to the east and south, and rural residential, agricultural, and wetlands towards the
west and north. Existing lands around Moody AFB can be generally classified as open, agricultural, and
low density with several residential subdivisions southwest of the base and small areas of commercial
development along State Highway 125. A few small- to medium-sized mobile home parks are located
adjacent to the northern end of the runways. In addition, mobile homes in the Green Valley and South
Gate Manor mobile home parks, along with the Shady Grove mobile home park, are located to the west of
the base just outside the south gate.
Most of Moody AFB is located in Lowndes County, including the entire main base. In 1997, the
Lowndes County population was the 20th largest in Georgia (out of 159 counties), making Lowndes the
largest county along the southern state line. Although much of the county retains a rural agricultural
character, the area has become increasingly developed and urbanized over the past 20 years.
The City of Valdosta is the most developed area in Lowndes County. Located 10 miles southwest of
Moody AFB, land use in Valdosta is predominantly residential, commercial, industrial, and public. Small
amounts of land north of Valdosta and along State Highway 125 near the installation remain undeveloped.
However, the city has been guiding development toward the west side of Valdosta (away from the base
and the base’s flight patterns) to maintain compatibility with aircraft operations. Older homes in low
density or open agricultural areas are located in northeast Valdosta, nearest the base. However, these
areas are not generally affected by Moody AFB flight activities. During normal flight operations, Moody
AFB aircraft do not overfly the city.
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
3-77
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Lanier County overlaps onto the eastern portion of the base property and includes most of the Grand Bay
Range. Lanier County consists almost entirely of rural agricultural land uses. Residential properties
consisting of low-density single family houses and mobile homes are located throughout the county,
primarily along U.S. Highway 221 connecting Valdosta with Lakeland, Georgia. Except for Lakeland,
there are no other significant population centers in the county. Moody AFB avoids using flight patterns
over the City of Lakeland.
Berrien County is located north of Moody AFB and is primarily a rural and agricultural region. Nashville
is the only significant population center. Housing consists primarily of single-family, low-density
detached houses and mobile homes. Neither Lanier nor Berrien Counties have established zoning
ordinances. Land use issues for these counties are addressed through local planning commissions (South
Georgia Regional Development Center 1999). Moody AFB flight operations have had very little impact
on land uses in these counties.
Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Program
The Air Force provides land use recommendations to local jurisdictions through the AICUZ program.
The purpose of the program is to promote compatible land use development in areas subject to aircraft
noise and accident potential. These guidelines have been established on the basis of studies prepared and
sponsored by several federal agencies, including the DoD. The guidelines recommend land uses that are
compatible with airfield operations while allowing maximum beneficial use of adjacent properties.
According to the AICUZ study for Moody AFB, there are only minor encroachments in the vicinity of
Moody AFB (Air Force 1994b). Noise contours from aircraft operations impact only small portions of
the developed land off base. The majority of the off-base land under the noise contours is undeveloped
and is expected to remain as open space, agricultural, and low density for the foreseeable future. The
majority of the Moody AFB clear zones lie on government property and within the base boundary. For
those portions outside the base boundary the government has acquired the land by fee or easement.
Accident Potential Zones (APZs) I and II extend off base to the north and south (Figure 3.12-1).
Major residential or commercial growth is not likely to occur northeast of Valdosta towards Moody AFB.
Major factors controlling growth around the base include the lack of sewer and potable water utilities, the
land owned by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GDNR) and USFWS, and the wetlands
along this corridor. The Lowndes County Planning Commission is funneling new growth along the I-75
corridor from south Valdosta north to Exit 6. This development corridor is well west of Moody AFB
flight paths and would not be regularly overflown at lower altitudes by Moody AFB aircraft.
3.12.1.2 ON-BASE LAND USE
Land use patterns at Moody AFB are shown on Figure 3.12-1. Airfield facilities are located to the east of
the main cantonment area. Located immediately to the west of the airfield are aircraft operations and
maintenance functions. This area acts as a buffer between the airfield and other areas of the installation.
Industrial land use areas are noncontiguous, with the largest area located on the western portion of the
cantonment area. Military family housing is located primarily to the west of Highway 125. Outdoor
recreational facilities are located throughout the installation in areas that are generally convenient to base
residents and employees (Air Force 1999k).
3-78
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,
,
,, ,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,,,
,, ,
,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,,,
,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,
,
,,
,,,
,,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,,,
,,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,
,
,,,
,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,
,
,,
,,,
,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,
,,,,,
,
,,
,,
,,,
,
,,
,
,
,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,
,
,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,
,,
,
,,,
,,
,
,
,,,,,
,
,,
,,
,
,
,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
Georgia
ew
MOODY
AFB
the
l
SC
N
★
Atlantic
Ocean
FL
Barretts
65
AL
122
NC
Be
TN
, ,,,,,,, ,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,,
,
,
,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,,, , , , ,
Gulf of
Mexico
70
nty R
o
C ou
125
hel
,,,,,,
75
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
ad
,,
,,
,,
,,
85
80
12
N
et
ew B
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
Moody
Air Force
Base
,,,
,,
,,,
85
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
Bemiss
Field
221
65
,,
,,,
,,
75
125
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
To Valdosta
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
70
80
Bemiss
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,,,
Land Use Designations
Agriculture
Federal/Military Lands
Commercial
Wetlands
,
,,
65
t
igh
Kn
LEGEND
Moody Air Force Base Boundary
,,,,,
Zone
,,,,, Clear
APZ I
APZ II
y
em
ad
c
sA
Baseline Noise Contour and dB Value
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, Residential
,,,,,,,,,,
0
5,000
Feet
Recreational
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of Moody AFB
Figure 3.12-1
3-79
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Grand Bay Weapons Range (R-3008). The Grand Bay Range, including the Banks Lake National
Wildlife Refuge (NWR), is located beneath R-3008. The town of Lakeland, Georgia is also located
beneath this airspace; aircraft are excluded from flying below 1,500 feet in this area which consists
mainly of wetlands and hardwood forest. The majority of the land is confined within the boundaries of
Grand Bay Range. Grand Bay Range is operated by Moody AFB and includes a main bomb site, strafing
beds, and additional targets. Portions of the Grand Bay Range are co-managed by Moody AFB
Environmental Flight and the GDNR, which operates the area under a license agreement as part of the
Grand Bay Wildlife Management Area (WMA). The Okefenokee NWR is located 40 miles to the east.
Several private residences and U.S. Highway 221 are also located east of Grand Bay Range. The majority
of land along the highway is privately owned and is either undeveloped or is used for forestry or
agriculture.
3.12.2 Airspace
Existing land uses beneath the affected airspace are described below; recreational resources within the
areas may be found in Section 3.13, Recreational and Visual Resources. Figures 3.12-2 through 3.12-10
depict land uses (for those airspace units where operations would occur below 8,000 feet MSL) and
SULMAs underlying the affected airspace. Table 3.12-1 presents the acreage of different land uses
underneath the affected airspace. The majority of the land beneath the affected airspace consists of
forest/vegetation (52.0 percent) and agriculture (33.0 percent). Wetland areas comprise 13.1 percent,
while the remainder (residential/urban, water, and other) collectively comprise 1.9 percent.
A number of noise sensitive receptors (i.e., schools and hospitals) underlie the affected airspace. A total
of 223 schools are located beneath the affected airspace (National Center for Education Statistics 1999).
The majority of these (180) are located under airspace which would be utilized by aircraft at altitudes of
8,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL) or greater (i.e., Moody 1, Moody 3, and Live Oak Military
Operations Areas [MOAs]; see Table 2.1-5). The remaining affected airspace, Moody 2 MOA, Visual
Route (VR)-1065, and VR-1066, have 6, 26, and 11 schools underlying them, respectively. Of the 23
hospitals that underlie the affected airspace, only 1 is located under an airspace (Moody 2 MOA) that has
aircraft operations below 8,000 feet MSL.
3.12.2.1 MOAS
Moody 1 MOA. Several towns including Adel, Fitzgerald, Lakeland, Moultrie, Mystic, Nashville,
Pearson, Quitman, Sparks, Tifton, Valdosta, and Willacoochee are located beneath the Moody 1 MOA.
Land beneath the MOA generally ranges from flat to gently sloping upland areas, interspersed with
numerous marshes, swamps, and lakes. The primary land uses include forest/vegetation and agriculture
consisting of 1.9 million (47 percent) and 1.7 million (42 percent) acres, respectively (Table 3.12-1).
Other land uses beneath the airspace include residential/urban, water, and wetland areas. The Banks Lake
NWR, a SULMA, is located under the Moody 1 MOA (Figure 3.12-2). The Okefenokee NWR is located
approximately 6 miles east of the Moody 1 MOA. State-managed SULMAs include the Grand Bay
WMA and three state parks (Georgia Veterans Memorial, Jefferson Davis, and Reed Bingham).
Moody 2 North and South (N/S) MOAs. Underlying land uses associated with Moody 2 N/S MOAs are
similar to those described for the Moody 1 MOA. There are several small communities beneath the
airspace, including Homerville (the largest), Du Pont, and Thelma. The primary land uses include
forest/vegetation and wetland areas consisting of approximately 433,000 (71 percent) and 167,500 (27
percent) acres, respectively (Figure 3.12-3, Table 3.12-1). Other land uses beneath the airspace include
3-80
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
agriculture, residential/urban, and water. No federal or state SULMAs are located underneath either of
the Moody 2 MOAs (Figure 3.12-4). Moody 2 N/S MOAs lie within 24 and 6 miles, respectively, of the
Okefenokee NWR.
Table 3.12-1. Land Use under Affected Airspace
Airspace
Category
Moody 1 MOA
Agriculture
Forest/Vegetation
Wetland Areas
Residential/Urban
Water
Other
Moody 2 N/S
MOAs
Agriculture
Forest/Vegetation
Residential/Urban
Water
Wetland Areas
Moody 3 MOA
Agriculture
Forest/Vegetation
Wetland Areas
Residential/Urban
Water
Other
Live Oak MOA
Agriculture
Forest/Vegetation
Wetland Areas
Residential/Urban
Water
Other
VR-1065
Agriculture
Forest/Vegetation
Wetland Areas
Residential/Urban
Water
Other
VR-1066
Agriculture
Forest/Vegetation
Wetland Areas
Residential/Urban
Water
Other
Square Miles
2,601
2,920
592
102
25
4
Total
6,244
16
677
3
1
262
Total
959
880
648
95
14
15
2
Total
1,654
542
828
184
29
9
9
Total
1,601
378
950
104
25
12
10
Total
Total
Grand Total
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
1,479
548
1,803
739
12
8
1
3,111
15,048
Acres
1,664,685
1,868,941
378,682
65,143
16,250
2,365
3,996,066
10,175
433,008
1,964
588
167,500
613,234
563,455
414,796
60,608
8,892
9,591
1,300
1,058,641
346,957
530,118
117,548
18,366
5,630
5,981
1,024,599
242,014
608,007
66,616
16,246
7,792
6,362
947,038
350,420
1,153,734
472,736
7,881
5,124
354
1,990,250
9,629,828
% of Total
41.7
46.8
9.5
1.6
0.4
0.1
100.0
1.7
70.6
0.3
0.1
27.3
100.0
53.2
39.2
5.7
0.8
0.9
0.1
100.0
33.9
51.7
11.5
1.8
0.5
0.6
100.0
25.6
64.2
7.0
1.7
0.8
0.7
100.0
17.6
58.0
23.8
0.4
0.3
0.0
100.0
3-81
Fl
,,
,,
,
,
i nt
FLINT
DOOLY
RIVER WMA
41
Vienna
DOOLY
Pineview
DODGE
129
SUMTER
280
,,,,
,,,,
LITTLE
Helena ,,,,
,,,,
Chauncey
OCMULGEE
STATE
Moody
1 PARK
MOA
WHEELER
8,000' –
17,999' MSL
17,999' MSL
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
De Soto
280
Scotland
23
WILCOX
Rhine
Abbeville
Cordele
441
280
BULLARD CREEK WMA
Lumber City
,,,
,,,
,,,
Rochelle
8,000' MSL
CRISP
,,
,
,,,
,,,,,
221
TELFAIR
319
TELFAIR
Pitts
GEORGIA VETERANS
STATE PARK
WHEELER
341
Moody 2 Hazlehurst
N/S MOAs
341
500'/100'
HORSE CREEK JEFF
WMA
AGL –
DAVIS
7,999' MSL
WILCOX
A
,,
,,
,,
Leslie
75
,,,,
,,,
Milan
er
R iv
280
McRae
L.
A
D
RI
Jacksonville
129
Rebecca
O
FL
Arabi
Warwick
Leesburg
Ashburn
IA
RG
319
TURNER
EO
G
Ground Surface
BEN HILL
LEE
23
Denton
Fitzgerald
Sycamore
19
41
Broxton
75
Albany
221
Ocilla
441
WORTH
Ambrose
GENERAL COFFEE
STATE PARK
82
Sumner
TIFT
Poulan
Ty Ty
Douglas
Tifton
Enigma
Phillipsburg
82
Baconton
319
Alapaha
Willacoochee
Omega
19
Doerun
MITCHELL
ATKINSON
Sale City
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
Ellenton,,,,
Riverside
Moultrie
Adel
COOK
EUFAULA
NWR
41
Berlin
75
Cecil
Litt
le
er
Riv
Coolidge
Ochlocknee
Pavo
Hahira
41
Cairo
BROOKS
84
Boston
84
84
Quitman
LOWNDES
CLINCH
OKEFENOKEE
SWAMP NWR
Naylor
Valdosta
221
Homerville
Du Pont
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Barwick
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
BANK’S LAKE NWR
GRAND BAY WMA
221
THOMAS
Thomasville
Argyle
129 Lakeland
125
319
84
441
LANIER
Moody AFB
Morven
GRADY
84
,,
,,
,,,,
Ray City
,
,,,
,
,
Meigs
WARE
Nashville
Sparks
REED BINGHAM
STATE PARK
Pelham
82
221
,,
EUFAULA
NWR
Funston
,,
,,
,,
129
Lenox
,,
,,,,
,,
Sale City
Camilla
Pearson
BERRIEN
Norman Park
COLQUITT
Alma
Nicholls
,,
,,
DOUGHERTY
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
IRWIN
Sylvester
Putney
BACON
COFFEE
129
ECHOLS
441
F
E
O
R
G
I
A
Lake Park
L
O
R
I
D
A
41
LEON
319
S
19
U
W A
N
N
E
Tallahassee
E
R
I
V
,,
E
R
W
M
Jennings
D
LEGEND
State and National Forests
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,, State Parks
,,,,,,,,,,,
Cities and Towns
Wetlands
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
HAMILTON
75
Wildlife Management Area (WMA)
County Boundary
National Wildlife Refuges (NWR)
3-82
OKEFENOKEE
SWAMP NWR
MADISON
Monticello
Moody 1 MOA
Fargo
221
JEFFERSON
,,
,
G
Suwannee River Water Management
District (WMD) Boundary/State Boundary
COLUMBIA
Jasper
Statute Miles
0
12
0
12
Nautical Miles
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of Moody 1 MOA
Figure 3.12-2
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
Willacoochee
82
135
520
441
221
158
31
17,999' MSL
Pearson
129
Moody 1 MOA
23
8,000' –
17,999' MSL
520
1
4
82
ATKINSON
BERRIEN
7,999' MSL
Moody 2
N/S MOAs
500'/100'
AGL –
7,999' MSL
76
A
L.
O
FL
221
D
RI
WARE
A
31
EO
G
Ground Surface
IA
RG
Nashville
82
135
129
125
MOODY 2 NORTH MOA
11
84
441
Ray City
37
WARE
Lakeland
129
37
38
Argyle
89
11
Homerville
LANIER
Du Pont
187
Moody AFB
CLINCH
31
221
125
Valdosta
11
Naylor
38
129
84
Okefenokee Swamp
187
LOWNDES
94
MOODY 2 SOUTH MOA
31
89
441
ECHOLS
41
7
Lake
Park
94
11
Fargo
94
129
75
94
G E O R G
I A
441
F L O R I D
A
Jennings
41
HAMILTON
100
25
47
129
441
COLUMBIA
LEGEND
Moody 2 MOA
Wetlands
State Boundary
Forest/Vegetation
County Boundary
Open Water
Urban/Residential
Other
Statute Miles
0
6
0
6
Nautical Miles
Agriculture
Land Use underneath Moody 2 North and South MOAs
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
Figure 3.12-3
3-83
520
Willacoochee 135
,,,
,,,
,,,
82
KING TRACT WMA
441
221
158
31
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
17,999' MSL
Pearson
Moody 1 MOA
23
8,000' –
17,999' MSL
129
520
ATKINSON
1
4
82
7,999' MSL
BERRIEN
Moody 2
N/S MOAs
500'/100'
AGL –
7,999' MSL
76
A
L.
O
FL
221
D
RI
WARE
A
31
EO
G
Nashville
82
IA
RG
Ground Surface
135
129
125
MOODY 2 NORTH MOA
11
84
441
Ray City
37
Lakeland
129
37
Argyle
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
WARE
,,,
,,,
,,,,
11
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
Homerville
LANIER
GRAND BAY WMA
187
Du Pont
Moody AFB
CLINCH
31
221
Valdosta
11
Naylor
38
129
84
187
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
BANK’S LAKE NWR
125
38
89
Okefenokee Swamp
LOWNDES
94
MOODY 2 SOUTH MOA
31
OKEFENOKEE
SWAMP
NWR
89
441
ECHOLS
41
7
Lake
Park
94
11
Fargo
94
129
75
94
G E O R G
I A
F L O R I D
A
Jennings
41
100
25
S U
W A
N
E
E
R
State Boundary
,,,
,,,
County Boundary
Cities and Towns
3-84
V
E
R
CYPRESS CREEK WMA
W
M
D
LEGEND
47
441
COLUMBIA
National Wildlife Refuges (NWR)
,,
,
Moody 2 MOA
Wetlands
I
,,
,,,,
,,
N
HAMILTON
129
,,,
,,,
,,,
441
Statute Miles
Wildlife Management Area (WMA)
0
Suwannee River Water Management District
(WMD) Boundary/State Boundary
0
6
6
Nautical Miles
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of
Moody 2 North and South MOAs
Figure 3.12-4
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Moody 3 MOA. The Moody 3 MOA overlies several small towns, including Blakely, Colquitt, and Ft.
Gaines, Georgia. The primary land uses include agriculture and forest/vegetation, consisting of 563,000
(53 percent) and 415,000 acres (39 percent), respectively (see Table 3.12-1). Other land uses beneath the
airspace include residential/urban, water, and wetland areas. Underneath this airspace lie the Kolomoki
Mound and George T. Bagby State Parks (Figure 3.12-5).
Live Oak MOA. The Live Oak MOA overlies several towns, including Branford, Fort White, Lake City,
Live Oak, Mayo, and White Springs. Land uses are primarily forest/vegetation and agriculture consisting
of 530,000 (52 percent) and 347,000 acres (34 percent), respectively (see Table 3.12-1). Other land uses
beneath the airspace include agriculture and residential/urban. There are several SULMAs in the area,
including the Ichetucknee Springs State Park, the Suwannee River, and the Big Shoals WMA (Figure
3.12-6). The Osceola National Forest is located about 3 miles east of Live Oak MOA.
3.12.2.2 MTRS
VR-1065. The towns of Attapulgus, Beachton, Calvery, and Metcalf, Georgia; and Paxton, Caryville,
Westville, Wausau, Altha, and Gretna, Florida are located beneath VR-1065. The primary land use under
VR-1065 is forest/vegetation consisting of 608,000 acres (64 percent) (Figure 3.12-7a and Figure 3.127b; see Table 3.12-1). Located beneath this airspace is Torreya State Park and located near this airspace
are the Ponce de Leon Springs and Falling Waters State Recreation Areas (Figure 3.12-8).
VR-1066. Several towns, including Hazelhurst, Thelma, and Willacoochee are located beneath VR-1066
(Figures 3.12-9a, 3.12-9b, 3.12-9c, 3.12-9d, and 3.12-9e). VR-1066 passes over the northern section of
the Okefenokee NWR. Noise sensitive areas beneath the airspace include Alapaha and DuPont, Georgia
(Figure 3.12-10). Forest/vegetation is the primary land use underneath VR-1066 consisting of 1.1 million
acres (58 percent) (see Table 3.12-1).
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
3-85
,,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,,, ,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,
,
,,,
,, ,,
,,
30
82
39
520
118
45
QUITMAN
520
131
BARBOUR
1
431
17,999' MSL
27
1
TERRELL
82
Cuthbert
332
8,000' MSL
RANDOLPH
LAKE WALTER F. GEORGE WMA
Shellman
Sasser
LA
GEORGE T. BAGBY
STATE PARK
BA
Ground Surface
M
A
O
FL
A
Coleman
520
EO
G
D
RI
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,
CLAY
,,,
IA
RG
Walter F. George
Lake
LEE
A
95
Dawson
520
82
LAKE WALTER F. GEORGE WMA
Moody 3 MOA
8,000' – 17,999' MSL
Fort Gaines
,
,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,
37
Abbeville
ALBANY NURSERY WMA
10
Albany
37
Edison
HENRY
DOUGHERTY
Bluffton
Morgan
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
CALHOUN
62
Leary
KOLOMOKI
39
95
,,,,,,, MOUNDS
,,,,,,, STATE PARK
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
Arlington
62
CHICKASAWHATCHEE
WMA
91
27
1
Haleburg
37
,
,
EUFAULA
NWR
Blakely
134
EARLY
Newton
62
Damascus
BAKER
Columbia
27
Chattah
52
1
ee
,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,
o och
,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
95
Ashford
er
12
97
91
MAYHAW WMA
Riv
Gordon
MITCHELL
Colquitt
370
84
37
91
MILLER
91
HOUSTON
EUFAULA
NWR
65
,,,
Webb
Jakin
97
311
G
262
E O
A M A
F
I
O
R
2
2
JACKSON
Bascom
1
84
91
D A
Malone
A
7
L
112
38
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
27
Brinson
GRADY
SEMINOLE
262
309
LAKE SEMINOLE WMA
Moody 3 MOA
State Boundary
County Boundary
,,,,
,,,
Cities and Towns
97
53
Iron City
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,
A L A B
Donalsonville
I
R G
53
DECATUR
Bainbridge
LEGEND
Wildlife Management Area (WMA)
Statute Miles
0
State and National Forests
7
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,, State Parks
,,,,,,,,,,,
0
7
Nautical Miles
National Wildlife Refuges (NWR)
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of Moody 3 MOA
3-86
Figure 3.12-5
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
CYPRESS CREEK WMA
75
TWIN RIVERS
STATE FOREST
10
90
lac
With o o c h
6
Madison
90
10
10
53
ee R
Lee
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
145
6
Jasper
6
HAMILTON
441
41
100
,,,,,
,,,,,
ive
r
,,,,,
SUWANNEE RIVER
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,STATE PARK
25
Ri
BIG SHOALS STATE FOREST
129
STEPHEN FOSTER ,,,
STATE FOLK ,,,
,,,
CULTURE CENTER ,,,
Live Oak
75
25
10
10
Lake City
COLUMBIA
25
55
PEACOCK SPRINGS
STATE RECREATION AREA
Perry
Five
Points
OSCEOLA NATIONAL FOREST
SUWANNEE
221
41
100
90
51
53
a
S u wS
White
Springs
Su w
ann
R iv er
249
ee
,,,
,,,
,,
,,, ,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
BIG SHOALS
WMA
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
vReri
ver
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
10
47
135
unwn
aenenee
53
MADISON
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,, ,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
41
129
441
249
27
20
27
Mayo
247
75
20
LAFAYETTE
47
98
ICHETUCKNEE SPRINGS
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
STATE PARK
,,,,,,,
27A
19
361
Branford
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
20
,,,,,,,
55
51
,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,
,
,
,
,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,
,
,,,,,
,
,,
,,,,,,
,
,,,,
,
,,,
17,999' MSL
a nne e Riv
8,000' MSL
er
Bell
GILCHRIST
Su w
L.
A
51
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
20 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
27,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
RIVER RISE STATE PRESERVE
Fort
White
er
ta
S an
e Riv
349
TIDE SWAMP WMA
27
18
F
TAYLOR
DIXIE
EO
G
A
D
RI
O
FL
49
IA
RG
Gulf of Mexico
Ground Surface
358
Live Oak MOA
8,000' – 17,999' MSL
349
55
County Boundary
Cities and Towns
Newberry
19
27A
98
Cross City
JENA WMA
Live Oak MOA
47
129
26
Trenton
LEGEND
State and National Forests
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,, State Parks and Preserves
,,,,,,,,,,,
Statute Miles
0
7
State Recreation Area
,,
,
Wetlands
0
7
Nautical Miles
Wildlife Management Area (WMA)
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of Live Oak MOA
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
Figure 3.12-6
3-87
3-88
COVINGTON
Florala
Lockhart
Slocomb
GENEVA
331
Paxton
A M A
F L O R
I D A
TN
231
Geneva
A L A B
HOUSTON
Eunola
Georgia
AL
Esto
Laurel Hill
Noma
NC
SC
Madrid
Black
Cottonwood
VR-1065
Graceville
MOODY
★AFB
Atlantic
Malone
Ocean
Campbellton
Bascom
Greenwood
Bonifay
Caryville
Cottondale
Westville
De Funiak
Springs
90
Gulf of
Mexico
Jacob City
HOLMES
Florida
Marianna
90
Chipley
10
10
JACKSON
MATCHLINE TO 3.12-7b
Ponce de Leon
Alford
OKALOOSA
Vernon
Wausau
331
River
WALTON
Valparaiso
Altha
WASHINGTON
wa
t c h ee
Freeport
Ch o c t a
Ebro
Blountstown
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
98
231
BAY
Gulf of Mexico
CALHOUN
LEGEND
VR-1065 Centerline and Corridor
Wetlands
State Boundary
Forest/Vegetation
County Boundary
Open Water
Urban/Residential
Other
Agriculture
Unknown
Statute Miles
0
7.5
0
7.5
Nautical Miles
Land Use underneath VR-1065 – Western Section
Figure 3.12-7a
Moultrie
TN
319
SC
Iron City
Georgia
AL
Donalsonville
Coolidge
VR-1065
MOODY
★AFB
Brinson
Atlantic
Ocean
Pavo
Ochlocknee
Bascom
NC
Meigs
84
HOUSTON
GRADY
SEMINOLE
Bainbridge
DECATUR
Whigham
THOMAS
84
JACKSON
MATCHLINE TO 3.12-7a
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
MITCHELL
MILLER
Florida
Gulf of
Mexico
Barwick
Cairo
Thomasville
Climax
Boston
Lake Seminole
84
Grand
Ridge
Attapulgus
Sneads
G E O R G
I A
Chattahoochee
F L O R I
D A
10
Havana
Gretna
90
Quincy
319
27
19
CALHOUN
Rive
r
Monticello
Apalac
h i c o la
Blountstown
Greensboro
90
Midway
GADSDEN
LIBERTY
Bristol
R iv er
10
Tallahassee
n ee
loc k o
Och
JEFFERSON
65
319
27
LEON
LEGEND
VR-1065 Centerline and Corridor
Wetlands
State Boundary
Forest/Vegetation
County Boundary
Open Water
Urban/Residential
Other
Statute Miles
0
7.5
0
7.5
Nautical Miles
Agriculture
3-89
Land Use underneath VR-1065 – Eastern Section
Figure 3.12-7b
Kinsey
,,,
,
Kinston
Horn Hill
Ashford
TN
BAKER
NC
SC
EUFAULA CHICKASAWHATCHEE
WMA
NWR
Damascus
EARLY
Columbia
Dothan
Clayhatchee
WORTH
DOUGHERTY
,
Daleville
Blakely
R GIA
84
County Line
Headland
Arlington
GEO
Pinckard
Enterprise
84
Andalusia
HENRY
Newton
BAMA
Opp
Babbie
DALE
ALA
Newville
231
Sanford
CALHOUN
Haleburg
New
Brockton
Heath
,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
331
,,,
,,,
,,,,
Leary
431
Ozark
COFFEE
Elba
AL
Newton
Baconton
Georgia
Doerun
19
27
VR-1065
Sale City
,,,,
,,
3-90
29
MOODY
★AFB
Camilla
Colquitt
Malvern
Hartford
331
L
O
R
A M A
I
231
Geneva
Madrid
Black
Graceville
N O R T H W E S T
HOLMES
De Funiak
Springs
10
F L O R I D A
90
Westville
Chipley
Rive
PONCE DE LEON
SPRINGS STATE
RECREATION Ponce de Leon
AREA r
OKALOOSA
Malone
Campbellton
FALLING WATERS
STATE
Jacob City
RECREATION
Bonifay
AREA
Caryville
,,
,,, ,,,
,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,
Donalsonville
Esto
D A
Noma
90
Jakin
Cottonwood
Laurel Hill
W M D
10
Vernon
SEMINOLE
STATE
PARK
,,,
Wausau
,,
,
,,,,,
,,
,
,
,
,,
,,,,,
Chattahoochee
Hiland Park
Panama City Beach
DEAD LAKES
STATE
RECREATION
AREA
GULF
State Boundary
County Boundary
Cities and Towns
,
,,
,,
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
ST. ANDREWS STATE RECREATION AREA
National Wildlife Refuges (NWR)
Wewahitchka
98
,,,
,,,
,,,
Midway
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,, State Parks
,,,,,,,,,,,,
Monticello
Tallahassee
90
LAKE TALQUIN
STATE FOREST
10
LEON
65
27
c kon
e
319
APALACHICOLA
NATIONAL
FOREST
WAKULLA SPRINGS
,,,,,,
,,,,,,STATE PARK
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
Sopchoppy
LEGEND
19
JEFFERSON
Woodville
WAKULLA
Wildlife Management Area (WMA)
State and National Forests
19
319
10
ECONOFINA
RIVER
STATE PARK
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,
,,,,
Panama City
VR-1065 Centerline and Corridor
Havana
27
Quincy
e
LIBERTY
Oc
hl o
Lynn Haven
GRAYTON BEACH
STATE RECREATION
Laguna Beach
AREA
Gulf of Mexico
231
ach
icol a
River
BAY
98
TOPSAIL HILL
STATE PARK
G E O R G
I A
F L O R I
D A
CALHOUN
,,
,
HENDERSON
BEACH
STATE
RECREATION
AREA
84
Attapulgus
eerr
RRiivv
Bristol
al
POINT WASHINGTON
STATE FOREST
Beach
Blountstown
PINE LOG
STATE FOREST
Boston
Gretna
,,,,,STATE PARK
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
Greensboro
Ap
,,,,,
Miramar ,,,,,
,,,,,
Ebro
Thomasville
90
GADSDEN
e
Choc
Destin
atc h e
taw
Cairo
Climax
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Altha
WASHINGTON
Freeport
Pavo
THOMAS
Barwick
84
LAKE SEMINOLE WMA
TORREYA
FRED GANNON ROCKY BAYOU
STATE RECREATION AREA
Whigham
Lake Seminole
THREE RIVERS
STATE RECREATION Sneads
AREA
WALTON
319
GRADY
Bainbridge
,,,
,,,
Grand
Ridge
Alford
Moultrie
EUFAULA NWR
Coolidge
LAKE SEMINOLE
WMA
,,,,FLORIDA CAVERNS
Cottondale ,,,, STATE PARK
,,,, Marianna
Florida
Ochlocknee
DECATUR
Greenwood
Riverside
Pelham
Gulf of
Mexico
Meigs
Brinson
SEMINOLE
Bascom
JACKSON
MITCHELL
Iron City
331
Valparaiso
98
84
,,
,,
,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,
,,,
F
EUFAULA
NWR
MILLER
,
A L A B
Paxton
MAYHAW WMA
,
Slocomb
Eunola
Florala
Lockhart
HOUSTON
GENEVA
Samson
Gordon
Avon
Taylor
Atlantic
COLQUITT
Ocean
State Recreation Area
319
St. Marks
,,,
,,,,
,
,,,
,
TAYLOR
98
HICKORY
ST. MARKS NATIONAL
,,,,,,,, MOUND
WILDLIFE REFUGE
,,,, UNIT WMA
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
Gulf of Mexico ,,,,,,,,
,,,,
0
,,,
,
,,,
,
,,,
Coffee Springs
COVINGTON
Funston
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
Statute Miles
15
0
15
Nautical Miles
Northwest Florida Water Management District (WMD) Boundary
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of VR-1065
Figure 3.12-8
,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,,,,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
, ,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,
,,
,,,,,,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,
,
,, , ,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,
,
,,
,,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,,
,
, , ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,,,
,
,,
,,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,
,
,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,
MATCHLINE TO 3.12-9e
v er
hee Ri
ooc
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Ocilla
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
129
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
441 ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
G
E,,,,,,,
O R G I A
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
MATCHLINE TO 3.12-9b
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
VR-1066
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
221
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
IRWIN
COFFEE
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
Douglas
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
MOODY
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
AFB
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
F L O R ,,,
I D,,,,,
A
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
82
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,, ,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
Enigma ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Alapaha
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
Willacoochee
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,, ,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,
W
illa
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,, ,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,, ,,, ,,,
,,,,,
c
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,, ,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
Pearson
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
BERRIEN
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
ATKINSON,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
82
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
129
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,
WARE
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
Nashville
221
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,, ,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,, ,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,, ,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,, ,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,
441
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
Ray
City,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,LANIER
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
yle
Argyle
COOK
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
84
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
129
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,
Homerville
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,Lakeland
,, ,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,, ,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
CLINCH
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,, ,,
,,,,, ,,,
,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,, ,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
441
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
Du Pont
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,, ,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,, ,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
LOWNDES
Moody AFB ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
Valdosta
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,, 84,, ,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,
,,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,
,
,,
,,,,
,,
,,
125
221
129
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
LEGEND
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,, ,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,
,, ,,,,,
, ,,, Naylor,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
41 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
, ,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Forest/Vegetation
VR-1066 Centerline and Corridor
Statute Miles
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
0
5
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Open Water
County Boundary
Urban/Residential
,,,,,,,,,,
75
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, Agriculture
Other
Unknown
0
5
Nautical Miles
Wetlands
Land Use underneath VR-1066
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
Figure 3.12-9a
3-91
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
MATCHLINE TO 3.12-9c
Oc o n e e
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
441
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
280
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
341
Eastman
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
Mount
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
LAURENS,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Glenwood
280
,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
G E ,,,
O ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
R G I ,,
A
Vernon
,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
VR-1066 ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,319
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
23
221
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,, ,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
Alamo
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,
,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
MONTGOMERY
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
Chauncey
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,, ,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
WHEELER
,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
DODGE
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Helena
MOODY ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Scotland
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
AFB
,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,, ,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
L O ,,,,,
R I D,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
A
,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, F ,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,, ,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
McRae
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
441 ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
23
Uvalda
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
Milan
,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
Rhine
280
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,, ,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
341
319
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
TELFAIR
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,, Lumber
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
City
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,, 221
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
r
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,, ,,, ,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,
Hazlehurst
WILCOX
,,, ,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,, ,,,, ,,,,,,
,, ,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,, 341
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,, ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, 129 ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
JEFF
DAVIS
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Jacksonville
,, ,,,,,,, G
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,
,,
, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,, ,, ,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
, ,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
BEN HILL ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
23
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
319,, ,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,, Denton
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
, ,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
Fitzgerald
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
Broxton
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
COFFEE
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
BACON
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
Ambrose
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
IRWIN ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
441,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
Ocilla
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,Alma
MATCHLINE
TO
3.12-9a
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
221 ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
Douglas
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
LEGEND
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Nicholls
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,, Statute Miles
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Forest/Vegetation
VR-1066
Centerline
and
Corridor
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
0
5
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Open Water ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
County
Boundary
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Other
Urban/Residential
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
0
5
,,,,,,,,,, Agriculture ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Nautical Miles
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Wetlands
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Riv er
e
lge
mu
Oc
Riv e
Land Use underneath VR-1066
3-92
Figure 3.12-9b
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
Willacoochee
W
, ,,
,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,, ,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,, ,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,
,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,, ,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
MATCHLINE TO 3.12-9b
Rive r
Oconee
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,
,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, Mount,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Lyons
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
280
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
Vernon,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
G
E O R G I A
Higgston
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
Collins
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
VR-1066
Manassas
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
Dai
Dais
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
Hagan
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
221
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
280
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
1,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,, ,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
TOOMBS
EVANS
MONTGOMERY
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Reidsville
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
MOODY
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,AFB
Alston
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, F L O R I D A
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Uvalda ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
301
TATTNALL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
25 ,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
Glennville ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Alt
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
am
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
a ha
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
R
i
ver
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,, 221,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,, ,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,
,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,
,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,, ,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,
,, ,,
ehurst
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,
, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,, ,,
,,, 341
,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,
,,, ,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,, APPLING
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,, ,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
JEFF DAVIS ,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
Graham
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
LONG
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,
,,,,,
,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,, ,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,, ,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
23
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Baxley
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
1
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Surrency
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,, ,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,, ,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Odum
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,
,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
Jesup ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
WAYNE
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
341
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
84,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
1
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
23
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,, BACON
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,, ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
Alma
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,301
MATCHLINE
TO 3.12-9d
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
LEGEND
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
olls
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,VR-1066,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
Forest/Vegetation
Centerline
and Corridor
Statute Miles
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
0
Screven5
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
Open
Water
County
Boundary
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
Other ,,,,,,,,,,,,
Urban/Residential
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
0
5
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Agriculture
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Nautical Miles
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Wetlands
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
PIERCE
Land Use underneath VR-1066
3.0 Affected Environment Land Use
Patterson
84
Figure 3.12-9c
3-93
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,, ,,
,,
,,,,,,,
, ,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,
,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,,,,,,
,,,
,
,
,
,,
,,
,,,
,
,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,
,
,,,
,
,
,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,, ,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,
,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,
,,,
,
,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,
,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,
,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
, ,,,
,,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,
,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,
,,
,,
,,
,
,,,
,
,
,
,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,
,,
,
,,
,,,,
,
,,
,
,
,
,,,
,
,,
,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,
,
,,,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,
,,,,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,
,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,
,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,, ,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
MATCHLINE TO 3.12-9c
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,
APPLING ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,
BACON
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
84 ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
301
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
Screven
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
WAYNE
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
PIERCE
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,, ,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Patterson
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,
,,,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,, ,,,,, ,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
Blackshear
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,
84
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, BRANTLEY
,,
,,,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, Nahunta
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
Waycross
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
82
,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,, ,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,Hoboken
,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,, 1
,,
,,
,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
23
,, ,,,
,, ,,,,
,,
,,,,, ,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,, ,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,
,,,
WARE
,,,,,,
,,
,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,
,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,, ,,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,, ,,, ,,,
,,
,,, ,, ,,, ,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,, ,,, ,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,, ,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,, ,,,
,,
,,,
,,
CHARLTON
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
MATCHLINE TO,,,,,,,,,,
3.12-9e
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,
1
,,
301
23
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
Homeland
,
,,,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,
,,
G
E
O
R
G
I
A
VR-1066
25
341
MOODY
AFB
F
L
O
R
I
D
,, ,,
,, ,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
A
,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
GLYNN
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
82
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
17
,,
,,
,,,
,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,
,, CAMDEN ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,
Woodbine
,,,,,,
,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
95
17
LEGEND
VR-1066 Centerline and Corridor
Forest/Vegetation
County Boundary
Open
Water
Folkston
Urban/Residential
Other
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, Agriculture
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,
,
Statute Miles
0
Ma
r
Unknown
0
Kingsland
5
Nautical Miles
t.
Wetlands
ys
5
S
Land Use underneath VR-1066
Riv e r
Figure 3.12-9d
Okefenokee Swamp
3-94
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
G
Hilliard
17
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,
,
,
,,
,
,
,
,
,,,,
,,,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,,
,,
,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,,
,
,
,,
,
,
,
,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,
,
,,
,
,,,,
,,
,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,
,
,,,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,,
,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,
,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,,,
,
,
,
,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,
,
,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,
,,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
,
,,
,,
,
,
,
,,
,
,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,
,
,
,
,,
,
,
,
,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,
,
,
,,,
,
,,
,,,
,
,,
,,
,,
,
,
,
,
,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,
,,
,,
,
,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,
,,
,
,,,
,
,
,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,
,
,
,,
,,
,
,,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,,
,
,
,,
,
,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,
,
,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,, ,,,
,, ,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,,
Homerville
,,
,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
Du Pont
84
,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
BRANTLEY
WARE
301
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,, ,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,, ,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,
Argyle
,,
,,
,,,,, ,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,, ,,
,,
,, ,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,,
,, ,,,
,, ,,,
,,
,,
MATCHLINE TO 3.12-9a
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
441
,, ,,,, ,,,,,,,
,, ,,,, ,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
84
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
CLINCH
1
MATCHLINE TO 3.12-9d
,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,, ,,,
,,,
,,, ,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,, ,,,,,
,,,,,
,, ,, ,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,, ,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
Folkston
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,
,,,,
CHARLTON
,,,,
,,,,
,,
S
er
G
Ri
nee
an
w
u
,,
,,23
E
,,
O
R
G
I
,,,
,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,
VR-1066
,,,,,,
,,
,,
A
Okefenokee Swamp
v
WARE
MOODY
AFB
441
F
L
O
R
I
R I DA
GIA
,,
,,
D A
,,
,,,,,
,,,
LEGEND
VR-1066 Centerline and Corridor
Wetlands
State Boundary
Forest/Vegetation
County Boundary
Open Water
Urban/Residential
Other
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,, Agriculture
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
Statute Miles
0
5
0
5
Nautical Miles
3-95
Land Use underneath VR-1066
Ho
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,
,,
, ,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,
,, ,,
,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,, H
,,
,, ,,,
,,,
,,
,
FLO
ECHOLS
GEOR
Fargo
,,
,,
Figure 3.12-9e
23
441
LAURENS
341
Mount
Vernon
Glenwood
319
Eastman
280
TN
Lyons
WHEELER
NC
Collins
Higgston
Manassas
Alamo
221
TOOMBS
,,,
,,,
,,,
LITTLE OCMULGEE STATE PARK ,,,
,,,
Chauncey
DODGE
MONTGOMERY
Helena
Scotland
McRae
441
Rhine
280
e
lge
mu
,,,
,,,
,,,
er
Riv
WILCOX
Lumber City
HORSE
CREEK WMA
★
Atlantic
Ocean
MOODY
AFB
301
TATTNALL
BULLARD CREEK WMA
TELFAIR
BRYAN
EVANS
VR-1066
25
,,,
,,,
,,,
SAVANNAH
COASTAL
NWR
Glennville
Alta
m
,
Oc
,,
,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
341
319
Uvalda
er
23
Reidsville
GORDONIAALTAMAHA
STATE PARK
Alston
R iv
Milan
aha
Rive
r
Hazlehurst
Pembroke
Georgia
AL
,,,
,,,
Oc o n e e
280
SC
Daisy
Hagan
280
1
FL
LIBERTY
Gulf of
Mexico
Hinesville
Gumbranch
BIG HAMMOCK
WMA
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,, ,, ,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,, ,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
129
JEFF DAVIS
Graham
341
Jacksonville
BEN HILL
319
APPLING
Baxley
23
1
,,,
,,,,
Fitzgerald
Odum
Broxton
Ocilla
441
221
LONG
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
Douglas
BACON
Alma
GENERAL COFFEE
STATE PARK
,,,,,,
IRWIN
Ludowici
Jesup
COFFEE
Ambrose
84
GRIFFIN
RIDGE WMA
Surrency
Denton
Walthourville
301
SANSAVILLA
WMA
WAYNE
Nicholls
25
Screven
341
LITTLE SATILLA WMA
Enigma
RAYONIER
WMA
PIERCE
82
LITTLE
SATILLA
WMA
KING TRACT WMA
Alapaha
129
84
1
ee River
ooch
ac
BERRIEN
Patterson
Willacoochee
Wi
ll
PAULKS
PASTURE
WMA
23
Blackshear
ATKINSON
Pearson
82
GLYNN
Nahunta
221
82
Nashville
Waycross
Hoboken
Ray City
BRANTLEY
WARE
Argyle
,,,
BANK’S LAKE NWR
GRAND BAY WMA
Moody AFB
Homerville
17
301
Du Pont
Woodbine
CLINCH
95
CAMDEN
OKEFENOKEE
125
1
84
Naylor
23
CHARLTON
Valdosta
441
R I DA
75
nn
NWR
Okefenokee Swamp
GIA
LOWNDES
a
uw
Ma
Kingsland
ry s
RUSSELL E. SIMMONS
MEMORIAL
Riv e r
S
STATE FOREST
FLO
Fargo
r
GEOR
Lake
Park
ECHOLS
ee R
ive
129
S
41
Folkston
,,
,,
STEPHEN C. FOSTER
STATE PARK
Homeland
t.
221
41
75
DIXON
MEMORIAL WMA
84
441
129 Lakeland
COOK
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
LANIER
,,,
,,, LAURA S. WALKER
,,, STATE PARK
ST. JOHNS RIVER
WMD
Hilliard
23
17
95
301
LEGEND
State Boundary
County Boundary
Cities and Towns
Wetlands
National Wildlife Refuges (NWR)
,,
,
VR-1066 Centerline and Corridor
Wildlife Management Area (WMA)
12
State and National Forests
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,, State Parks
,,,,,,,,,,,
0
12
Nautical Miles
St. Johns River Water Management District (WMD) Boundary
SULMAs underneath and in the Vicinity of VR-1066
3-96
Statute Miles
0
Figure 3.12-10
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.12.3 Transition Training Airports
As discussed in Section 3.4, Safety, civilian airports have Runway Protection Zones (RPZs) at the end of
each runway. The primary purpose of these areas is to preserve and enhance the protection of people and
property on the ground. Compatible land use within the RPZ is generally restricted to agricultural, golf
courses, and similar uses which do not involve congregations of people or construction of buildings, or
other improvements that may be obstructions. Land uses prohibited from RPZs are residences and places
of public assembly (e.g., churches, schools, hospitals, office buildings, and shopping centers) (Federal
Aviation Administration [FAA] 1999).
3.12.3.1 SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL AIRPORT
The primary land uses in the immediate vicinity of the Southwest Georgia Regional Airport (SGRA) are
industrial and residential with undeveloped and agricultural land found to the south, southwest, and west
of the airport (Figure 3.12-11). Current airport operations are not inconsistent with the commercial,
residential, agricultural, and industrial land uses of the surrounding area (SGRA 1998).
3.12.3.2 VALDOSTA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Existing land use adjacent and within the vicinity of Valdosta Regional Airport is comprised primarily of
industrial and agricultural land uses with residential development concentrated to the east of the airport
(Figure 3.12-12) (Valdosta – Lowndes County Airport Authority 1992). Currently there are no land use
compatibility issues associated with the airport property or property surrounding the airport.
3.12.3.3 TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Lands surrounding the Tallahassee Regional Airport are characterized by tracts of publicly-owned lands
that are largely undeveloped, protected, or minimally-developed privately-owned tracts. The airport acts
as a dividing line between the rural areas located to the southwest and west of the airport and those more
densely developed urban land uses found in the City of Tallahassee to the north, northeast, and east. The
area to the north, northeast, and east can be described as typical of an urban fringe pattern of development
with low-density, single-family subdivisions and mobile home parks (Figure 3.12-13). The Apalachicola
National Forest borders most of the airport’s western and southern boundaries. Other public lands in the
vicinity of the airport include the Florida State Seminole Golf Course and Springsax Park 1.5 miles and 1
mile, respectively, to the northeast (City of Tallahassee 1996).
3.12.3.4 LAKE CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
Land use surrounding Lake City Municipal Airport consists primarily of agricultural and industrial uses
with some residential (predominantly mobile home parks) areas to the north and west of the airport
(Figure 3.12-14). Currently there are no land use compatibility issues associated with the airport property
or property surrounding the airport (City of Lake City 1996).
3.12.3.5 GAINESVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Land use surrounding Gainesville Regional Airport consists primarily of industrial uses with some
agricultural areas to the west of the airport (Figure 3.12-15). Currently there are no land use compatibility
issues associated with the airport property or property surrounding the airport (Gainesville Regional
Airport 1999c).
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
3-97
,,,
,, ,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,
, , ,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,,,,
,,,
,,,
,
,, ,,,,, ,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,, ,
,
N MCKINLEY ST
AVENUE
ee k
Pe
S. MADISON ST.
C E NTENNIAL
SOUTH HARDING STREET
si
rco
234
E
ENU
N AV
RDO
T GO
WES
r
nC
S. MCKINLEY STREET
W GORDON AVENUE
91
JEFFERIES
AVENUE
LIPPITT DRIVE
RO
AD
ALICE AVENUE
S. SLAPPEY BLVD.
E DR.
W. OAKRIDG
MARTIN
TIN LUTHER KING JR DR
234
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,, ,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,
,
,
,
,,, , ,, , , , , , ,,,
,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,
, ,,
,,, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,, ,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,
, ,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,
SOUTH MADISON STREET
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
WEST OAKRIDGE DRIVE
WESTTOWN ROAD
ENGLISH ROAD
S. WESTOVER BOULEVARD
NE
W
TO
N
INDUSTRY AVENUE
STORY ROAD
PAULK DRIVE
62
91
HOWARD DRIVE
DR
IVE
JR .
L.
KIN
G
34
MAR
TIN
ET
O
RI
A
O
LD
PR
ISON STREET
DIS
S . MAD
HARVEY ROAD
04
OAK HAVEN DRIVE
Georgia
GEORGIA
★ SOUTHWEST
REGIONAL AIRPORT
MOODY AFB
★
Atlantic
Ocean
Florida
Gulf of
Mexico
NGS ROAD
NE
W
TO
N
RO
AD
LILY POND ROAD
BLUE SPRI
LEARY ROAD
HENDERSON RD.
,,,
,,,,
RO
AD
22
,
16
SOUTHWEST
GEORGIA
REGIONAL
AIRPORT
62
91
,,,
,,,
,,
LEGEND
,
,
,,
,,
Southwest Georgia Regional
Airport Boundary
Runway Protection Zone
Source: SGRA 1998.
,,
Land Use Designations
,
,,,,,
City of Albany
Agriculture
Commercial
Residential
Industrial
Institutional
,,,,, Communication/Utilities
Transportation/
3,000
Feet
Undeveloped
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport, Albany, Georgia
3-98
0
Figure 3.12-11
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
b
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
VALDOSTA
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
REGIONAL
AIRPORT
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Fern Pond
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
RIA
UST
ARD
LEV
OU
LB
IND
LEVARD
INDUSTRIAL BOU
41
S
N HEIGHT
MADISO
DRIVE
31
7
IVE
HIGHLAND DR
OL
D
J
AD
RO
DAS
HE R
DRIVE
LE
VIL
TT
YAT
CL
MAGNOLIA CIRCLE
AM
ES
P. RODGERS DRIVE
AVENUE
HORACE
ST
INSON
HUTCH
AD
AIRPORT RO
REET
POOLE
WATSO N
V
LANE
STREET
22 17
COPELAND
ROAD
HARTER AVENUE
AVENUE
RAY
13
C
OL
E
ILL
TV
TT
LYA
EET
RIA STR
401
ALEXAND
HENRY AVENUE
AD
RO
31
04
D
31
Georgia
35
MOODY
AFB
★
★
Atlantic
Ocean
Florida
CH
LO
401
VALDOSTA
REGIONAL
AIRPORT
EL
R
LAU
Gulf of
Mexico
AD
ROLL ULME R RO
CAR
AD
RO
31
LEGEND
Valdosta Regional Airport Boundary
Runway Protection Zone
Open Water
Sensitive Noise Receptors
V
b Church
School
,,,,,,
,,,,,, Industrial
Land Use Designations
Agriculture
Residential
0
2,000
Feet
Source: Valdosta-Lowndes County Airport Authority 1992.
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of
the Valdosta Regional Airport, Georgia
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
Figure 3.12-12
3-99
,
,
,
,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
3-100
263
Bradford
Brook
Georgia
★
Atlantic
Ocean
★ TALLAHASSEE
REGIONAL AIRPORT
,,,
,,,
WEST ORANGE AVENUE
MOODY AFB
HOLTON STREET
,,,,,,,,
,,, , ,,,
,,, ,,,
,, ,,,
,, ,,,
,, ,,,
,, ,,,
,, ,,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,, , , ,
, ,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,,,
,,, , , , ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,, , ,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,, , ,,, ,,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,
,,, , , ,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,,,
,,,,,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,, ,
,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
b
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
V
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Grassy
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Lake
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Black
Lake Bra
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
dfo
Swamp
rd
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Lake
Bradford
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
b
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
b
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
Lake
b Henrietta
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
TALLAHASSEE
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
REGIONAL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
AIRPORT
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
b
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
CALLEN ST.
371
373
371
18
R DRIVE
TA NNE
ROAD
Gulf of
Mexico
l
na
Ca
373A
SPRINGSAX DRIVE
NORTH RIDGE
Florida
SEASONS LANE
LO
NG
LE
AF
ROAD
373
263
BALKIN ROAD
WEST WAY ROAD
ISABELLE DR.
LONNIE GRAY ROAD
Lake Munson
373
MUNSON BLVD.
LEGEND
,,
,,
,
City of Tallahassee
Tallahassee Regional Airport Boundary
Runway Protection Zone
Open Water
Wetlands
Land Use Designations
Mixed Use
,,,,,,
,,,,,,Institutional
,,
,
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
,,
ROAD
263
RUTHENIA ROAD
D
OA
HR
ER RO
AKE TOW
AD
GL
373
BALLARD
C
UR
CH
DO
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,
RAINBOW RD.
Munson Slough
HO
PE
ESTATES ROAD
27
09
NE
W
BLUEBIRD ROAD
36
EAGLE RD.
,,
Sensitive Noise Receptors
Residential
Apalachicola National Forest
V School
b Church
Agriculture
0
3,000
Feet
Source: City of Tallahassee 1996.
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the Tallahassee Regional Airport, Florida
Figure 3.12-13
,
,,,,
,
,
,,,,,
,
,,,,
,
,
,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,, , , ,
, , , , , ,,
,,
,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,
,
,
,
,,,
,,,,,
,,, ,,,,
,, ,,,
,, ,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,,
RANGE ROAD
ILL
AD
RO
ST
,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
OKINAWA STREET
Watertown
Lake
10
10
90
90
LAKE CITY
MUNICIPAL
AIRPORT
100
23
AE
RO
01
JENESE ST.
PEARL STREET
Georgia
EMERSON
PRICE CREEK ROAD
R
BOY ST.
,
,,
10A
DRIVE
CRAIG AVENUE
MO
BILL BARTS STREET
D.
YR
OD
WAS HINGTON STREET
,,
,,,
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
GE RD
AV
10
90
EN
UE
28
05
MOODY AFB
★
Atlantic
Ocean
AE
★
RO
LAKE CITY
MUNICIPAL
AIRPORT
245
AVENUE
FAYE WAY
100
Florida
Gulf of
Mexico
City of Lake City
,
,
,,,,
,,
,,
,
245A
Runway Protection Zone
Open Water
Source: City of Lake City 1996.
Land Use Designations
Industrial
,,
,
Lake City Municipal Airport Boundary
LEGEND
Agriculture
Commercial
0
2,000
Feet
Residential
3-101
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the Lake City Municipal Airport, Florida
Figure 3.12-14
,,,,,,,, , ,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,
,,,,,,,,,,,
, , ,,,,,,,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,
,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,, , , , , , , , , , , ,
,,, , , , , , , , , , ,,,
,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,, , , , , , ,,,, ,,
,,,
,, ,,
,
,,,
,,,,,
,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,, , ,,
,
,,
,,,
,
,,,, ,
,,,
,
,,,,,, , ,
,,,
, ,,,,,, , ,
,,,
, ,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
,,
,
,,,
,,
,
,,,
,,
,
,,,
,,
,
,,, , ,
,,
,
,,, ,,,,,,,,,
,,
,
,,,,,,,, ,,,,
,,
,
, , , ,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,, ,,,,, , , , , , , , , ,
,,,,, ,,,,,
,,,,,, ,,,
, ,,,,,,,,
,,,
3-102
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
SPERRY DRIVE
★
NE 49TH DR.
Hatchett
NE 51ST PLACE
NE 49TH RD.
Cr
eek
NE 17TH TERRACE
,
,,,,
,
,
,
NE 15TH STREET
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,
NE 32ND AVE.
NE 31ST AVENUE
GAINESVILLE
REGIONAL
AIRPORT
01
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
06
28
222
24
NE 15TH ST.
HA
VE
NU
E
3.0 Affected Environment: Land Use
NE 20TH AVE.
City of Gainesville
Gainesville Regional Airport Boundary
Runway Protection Zone
,,,
,,,
LEGEND
Agriculture
Residential
Industrial
Land Use Designations
,,
Commercial
222
NE 27TH AVE
NE 23RD AVENUE
,,,,
,,
120
39T
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,, ,
,,,, ,,
,
,
,
,,,
,
,
,
NE 28TH AVE.
NE
Florida
Gulf of
Mexico
24
NE 40TH PL.
222
Atlantic
Ocean
GAINESVILLE
REGIONAL
AIRPORT
RRO
OA
AD
D
le
Litt
★
NE
N
EW
WA
ALLD
DO
O
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
MOODY AFB
,
,
NE 53RD AVENUE
Georgia
24
Institutional
,,,,, Conservation
,,,,,
,,,,, Recreation
Public Facilities
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,
26
Education
Planned Use
Existing Land Use in the Vicinity of the Gainesville Regional Airport, Florida
0
2,500
Feet
Figure 3.12-15
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.13 RECREATION AND VISUAL RESOURCES
Recreational resources include natural resources and human-made facilities designated or available for
public recreational use. The setting, activity, and other elements that characterize affected recreational
areas are considered in order to assess potential impacts.
Visual resources are the natural and manufactured features that constitute the aesthetic qualities of an
area. These features form the overall impression that an observer receives of an area or its landscape
character. Landforms, water surfaces, vegetation, and manufactured features are considered characteristic
of an area if they are inherent to the structure and function of the landscape. Generally, any activity that
has the potential to alter the quality or distinguishable characteristic of the perceived environment may be
considered as having an effect on the visual resources of that area.
3.13.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity
3.13.1.1 RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
Recreational resources at Moody Air Force Base (AFB) include a variety of outdoor activities including
fields for baseball, softball, football, and soccer; a golf course; outdoor swimming pools; tennis and
basketball courts; and playgrounds. The recreational facilities are located throughout the installation in
areas that are generally convenient to base residents and employees. However, the largest facility is the
489-acre Grassy Pond Recreational Annex owned by Moody AFB; it is located 25 miles south of the
base. This recreation area contains two lakes (Grassy and Lott Ponds) that comprise 217 and 44 acres,
respectively. The property was originally purchased by the U.S. government as a fish hatchery and was
established as recreational area by the U.S. Department of the Air Force (Air Force) in 1954. Recreation
opportunities include fishing, boating, and picnic facilities (Air Force 1999k).
Other popular recreational areas are the nearby Grand Bay Wildlife Management Area (WMA) and Banks
Lake National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) (see Figure 3.12-2). The Grand Bay WMA is co-managed by the
Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GDNR) and Moody AFB. It includes a campground, picnic
tables, and restrooms that are open to both military personnel and the general public on weekends (Air
Force 1999k). Grand Bay WMA is used for outdoor recreational activities such as bird-watching,
canoeing, mountain biking, hunting, fishing, and archery. Banks Lake NWR, located approximately 6
miles to the northeast of Moody AFB, is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and
provides hiking and fishing opportunities.
3.13.1.2 VISUAL RESOURCES
The terrain around Moody AFB includes flat to sloping plateaus separated by shallow river valleys and
broad wet depressions. The most developed area in the vicinity of the installation is the City of Valdosta,
located approximately 10 miles southwest of the base. Most of the undeveloped land on the installation
and in the vicinity consists either of heavily forested areas (a result of natural invasion of abandoned
farmlands) or of planted loblolly pine plantations (Air Force 1999k).
Generally, Moody AFB has a rural visual characteristic. The nearest community is Barretts, located 1
mile north of the installation along State Highway 125. The highway provides primary access into the
installation and bisects the base. Military functions (such as administration, base support, aircraft
operations and maintenance areas, and the airfield) are located east of State Highway 125. Non-military
functions (including family housing, golf course, trailer area, and sewage treatment plant) are located
3.0 Affected Environment: Recreation and Visual Resources
3-103
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
west of State Highway 125. Open space and recreational facilities, including several athletic fields,
visually buffer the highway on the west. Forested land and open space provide visual buffering to the
east (Air Force 1999k).
The Grand Bay Range consists of approximately 5,874 acres located east of the airfield. The area
includes scenic resources such as wetlands, open fields, and stands of loblolly pine. A portion of the
range is within the Grand Bay WMA.
3.13.2 Airspace
The following describes the recreational and visual resources under the affected Military Operations
Areas (MOAs) and Military Training Routes (MTRs) used by Moody AFB aircrews (Table 3.13-1).
Descriptions of the type and extent of the airspace may be found in Section 3.1, Airspace; land uses under
the airspace are included in Section 3.12, Land Use.
Table 3.13-1. Recreation Areas under Affected Airspace
Recreation Area
National Wildlife Refuges
Banks Lake
Eufaula
Okefenokee
Wildlife Management Areas
Big Hammock
Big Shoals
Bullard Creek
Chickasawhatchee
Grand Bay
Horse Creek
Lake Walter F. George
Little Satilla
Mayhaw
Rayonier
State and National Forests
Big Shoals State Forest
Osceola National Forest
State Recreation Areas
Peacock Springs
State Parks
George T. Bagby
Georgia Veterans
Ichetucknee Springs
Kolomoki Mounds
Reed Bingham
Stephen C. Foster
Stephen Foster
Suwannee River
Torreya
3-104
State
GA
GA
GA
GA
FL
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
Moody 1
MOA
x
x
Moody 2
MOA
Airspace
Moody 3 Live Oak
MOA
MOA
VR-1066
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
FL
FL
x
x
FL
x
GA
GA
FL
GA
GA
GA
FL
FL
FL
VR-1065
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
3.0 Affected Environment: Recreation and Visual Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.13.2.1 RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
Moody 1 MOA. The Banks Lake National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) and subunits of the Eufaula NWR are
located under the Moody 1 MOA (see Figure 3.12-2). State managed recreation areas include the Grand
Bay WMA and two state parks (Georgia Veterans Memorial and Reed Bingham) (GDNR 1999).
Moody 2 North and South MOAs. No federal or state managed recreational areas are located underneath
either of the Moody 2 MOAs (see Figure 3.12-4). Moody 2 North and South MOAs lie within 24 and 12
miles, respectively, of the Okefenokee NWR.
Moody 3 MOA. Underlying the Moody 3 MOA are the Kolomoki Mounds and George T. Bagby State
Parks (GDNR 1999). Other recreational areas are provided at subunits of the Eufaula NWR (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1999f) (see Figure 3.12-5).
Live Oak MOA. There are several recreational areas under the Live Oak MOA, including the Ichetucknee
Springs, Stephen Foster, and Suwannee River State Parks (Florida Department of Environmental
Protection [FDEP] 1999a). Other areas include the Big Shoals State Forest, Big Shoals WMA, and
Peacock Springs State Recreation Area. Portions of the Osceola National Forest underlie the eastern edge
the Live Oak MOA (Florida Division of Forestry 1999).
Visual Route 1065 (VR-1065). Although numerous recreational areas are located to the north and south of
VR-1065 (e.g., Ponce de Leon Springs State Recreation Area, Three Rivers State Recreation Area, and
Apalachicola National Forest), Torreya State Park is the only recreational area underlying the route
(FDEP 1999a) (see Figure 3.12-8).
VR-1066. VR-1066 passes over the northern section of the Okefenokee NWR (see Figure 3.12-10)
(USFWS 1999f). Stephen C. Foster State Park is located within the Okefenokee NWR boundaries and
underlies the southern edge of VR-1066 (GDNR 1999).
3.13.2.2 VISUAL RESOURCES
The airspace training areas used by Moody AFB aircraft cover the southeastern U.S. from central Georgia
to the north, the South Atlantic Gulf Region to the east, northern Florida to the south and the western
panhandle of Florida to the west. Topography under this region ranges from the gently rolling uplands of
the southern coastline to a height of 1,500 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the Piedmont Plateau
region in north-central Georgia. Both rural (National Forests, Wild and Scenic Rivers, etc.) and urban
(historic structures, parks, etc.) visual resources are located underneath the airspace. In general, the area
may be visually characterized as rural to semi-rural.
3.13.3 Transition Training Airports
3.13.3.1 SOUTHWEST GEORGIA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Although typically not considered a recreational facility, the Southwest Georgia Regional Airport
(SGRA) is used by pilots for recreational flying. The nearest recreational resource is the On-airport
Playground for children, located just to the northwest of the northeast-southwest trending runway in a
residential area. No other recreational facilities are known from the immediate vicinity (SGRA 1998).
The SGRA consists of buildings and facilities generally associated with a mid-sized regional airport.
These facilities include a two-story passenger terminal and support facilities (e.g., public parking, rental
car facilities), general aviation facilities, air cargo facilities, and airport rescue and firefighting facilities.
3.0 Affected Environment: Recreation and Visual Resources
3-105
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
The area in the immediate vicinity of the airport consists primarily of industrial and corporate parks. The
visual landscape consists of warehouses, hangars, and other industrial style structures (SGRA 1998).
3.13.3.2 VALDOSTA REGIONAL AIRPORT
Like SGRA, the Valdosta Regional Airport is used by pilots for recreational flying. The closest
recreational resource is a racetrack, located just south of airport property. Similar to SGRA, the visual
landscape consists of the airfield, supporting structures, and surrounding industrial, commercial, and
agricultural land (Valdosta – Lowndes County Airport Authority 1992).
3.13.3.3 TALLAHASSEE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Although typically not considered a recreational facility, the Tallahassee Regional Airport (SGRA) is
used by pilots for recreational flying. Recreational facilities in the vicinity include the Museum of
Historic Natural Science, Jack Gaither Golf Course, Springsax Park, the Apalachicola National Forest,
and numerous lakes. The airport consists of buildings and facilities generally associated with a mid-sized
regional airport. These facilities include a three-story passenger terminal and support facilities (e.g.,
public parking, rental car facilities), general aviation facilities, air cargo facilities, and airport rescue and
firefighting facilities. The area in the immediate vicinity of the airport consists primarily of industrial,
open space, and mixed use (i.e., industrial, commercial, and low-density residential). The visual
landscape consists of warehouses, hangars, and other industrial style structures. In addition, the Thomas
P. Smith Sewage Treatment Plant, owned by the City of Tallahassee, is located at the eastern end of
Runway 27 (City of Tallahassee 1996).
3.13.3.4 LAKE CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
Although typically not considered a recreational facility, the Lake City Municipal Airport is used by
pilots for recreational flying. No recreational resources were identified surrounding the airport. The
visual characteristics are similar to other smaller airports consisting of the airfield, supporting structures,
and surrounding rural landscape (City of Lake City 1996).
3.13.3.5 GAINESVILLE REGIONAL AIRPORT
Although typically not considered a recreational facility, the Gainesville Regional Airport is used by
pilots for recreational flying. No recreational resources were identified surrounding the airport complex.
The visual landscape consists of the airfield, supporting facilities, and surrounding industrial, commercial,
residential, and open space lands.
3-106
3.0 Affected Environment: Recreation and Visual Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
3.14 TRANSPORTATION
Transportation refers to the movement of vehicles on roadway networks. Transportation systems in the
vicinity of Moody Air Force Base (AFB) include roads, airports, and railroads. Transportation systems
beneath the airspace areas are not affected by aircraft overflights. Therefore, for transportation resources,
the region of influence (ROI) for the proposed action and alternative includes roadway networks on base
and in the vicinity of Moody AFB, as well as and those areas likely to be used for base access.
3.14.1 Moody AFB and Vicinity
3.14.1.1 REGIONAL AND LOCAL
Moody AFB is located approximately 10 miles northeast of the City of Valdosta, Georgia. The primary
arterial (i.e., major roadway) in the area is Interstate 75 (I-75) which passes through Valdosta and runs
north to Macon and Atlanta. I-75 connects with I-10 (another major interstate that runs east-west across
the U.S.) approximately 52 miles south of the base. Moody AFB is connected to Valdosta and I-75 by
State Highway 125. This highway consists of four lanes with left turn bays at the major intersections.
According to the Georgia Department of Transportation (DOT), the accident rate on Bemiss Road (State
Route 125) is 67 percent higher than the statewide average. The estimated annual daily traffic was 20,000
vehicles per day (VPD) in 1993, with a projected 2010 count of 24,500 VPD (Air Force 1998b).
Interpolating this data puts the baseline daily traffic count at approximately 22,120 VPD. Consequently,
the Georgia DOT recently completed environmental documentation to widen Bemiss Road along an
8.8-mile stretch from Valdosta to just north of the Moody AFB boundary (Georgia DOT 1997). This
improvement project consists primarily of separating the existing four-lane road with a 20-foot wide,
raised grass median. Left turn lanes would be constructed in the median, including lanes providing access
to the base.
3.14.1.2 INSTALLATION
Access. Moody AFB has three access gates (Main, South, and North), all located within the cantonment
area (Figure 3.14-1). The Main Gate is on Mitchell Road, and the South Gate is located on Robbins
Road. Both of these gates open onto State Highway 125 where traffic is controlled by signal lights. The
third gate (North Gate) opens onto Hightower Road, which connects to State Highway 125.
Moody AFB has a baseline population of 3,306 (including officers, enlisted, civilian, and contractors) but
only 303 family housing units and 1,000 dormitory rooms on-base (Moody AFB 1999a). Therefore, the
majority of personnel commute to Moody AFB from off-base locations. Based on traffic counts in the
area, at least three-quarters of these commuters arrive from the south, likely from locations in and near
Valdosta (Air Force 1998a).
Circulation. The majority of traffic through the installation is provided via Mitchell Road, Austin Ellipse
Road, Robbins Road, and Robinson Road. Major collectors on the installation include Berger, Burrell,
Davis, Dexter, George, Georgia, and Hickam Streets. Access to the Grand Bay Range from the main base
is via a dirt and gravel road off South Perimeter Road, south of the munitions storage area. The range can
also be accessed from the Lakeland Highway (State Highway 221) or from County Road 12. The main
access to Grand Bay Range offices is from County Road 12. Access to Bemiss Field is primarily along
Burma Road with a secondary access from State Highway 221 (Figure 3.14-1).
3.0 Affected Environment: Transportation
3-107
TN
the
l
NC
ew
Georgia
N
AL
Be
SC
MOODY
AFB
★
FL
C
ou
Gulf of
Mexico
n ty
Atlantic
Ocean
Ro
ad
12
125
NORTH GATE
Main
Base
BU
RR
AD
ROBBINS
DAVIS ROAD
BE
RG
ER
GE
ST
OR
RE
GE
ET
ST
RE
ET
DEXTER ST.
DA
RQ
UE
BL
VD
SAVANNAH STREET
EE
AM
TR
RO
LS
CK
LL
HI
HE
T
ST
TC
EL
MI
RE
ET
PERIMETER
ROBBINSON RD.
MAIN GATE
SOUTH
GATE
RO A D
NORTH PERIMETER ROAD 18L/36R
.
Moody
Air Force
Base
ROAD
Grand
Bay Range
B U RM
A RO
AD
Bemiss
Field
18R/36L
BURMA RO
A
D
221
LEGEND
Moody Air Force Base Boundary
Arterial Road
Collector Road
0
Base Road
Source: Air Force 1999k.
Transportation Plan at Moody AFB
3-108
4,000
Feet
Gate
Figure 3.14-1
3.0 Affected Environment: Transportation
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Traffic congestion generally occurs at the gates during the start and end of every workday. The
incorporation of flex time has greatly decreased traffic congestion by allowing personnel to begin work
from 7:30 to 8:00 A.M. and leave from 4:30 to 5:00 P.M., respectively, thus spreading out traffic during
peak hours (Air Force 1999k).
Parking. Parking at Moody AFB is considered adequate. Some overcrowding occurs in the 7000 block
of Robbins Road and at the Mobility Processing Center during mobility operations. Military personnel on
deployment usually park in their respective squadron areas for an extended time period (Air Force
1999k). At times this creates parking congestion for permanently assigned personnel. However, these
circumstances are intermittent and more of an inconvenience than a problem.
3.0 Affected Environment: Transportation
3-109
4.0
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
This chapter presents an assessment of the potential impacts of implementing the proposed action or
alternative. To evaluate impacts, the analysis presented in this chapter overlays the components of the
proposed action or alternative described in Chapter 2.0 onto baseline conditions provided in Chapter 3.0.
Cumulative effects of the proposed action with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future
actions at Moody Air Force Base (AFB) and the region of influence (ROI) are presented in Chapter 5.0.
4.1 AIRSPACE
This section analyzes impacts of the proposed action on the structure, management, and use of the
affected airspace. This evaluation focuses on whether the proposed action would require alteration of
airspace management procedures and assesses the capability of the airspace to accommodate the proposed
use.
Impacts could occur if implementation of the proposed action or alternative affects the movement of other
air traffic in the area, air traffic control (ATC) systems or facilities, or accident potential for mid-air
collisions between military and non-participating civilian operations. Potential impacts were assessed to
determine the extent that proposed aircraft changes would make to existing relationships with federal
airways, transition areas, and airport-related air traffic operations. Also considered were the potential
effects to instrument flight rules (IFR) and visual flight rules (VFR) air traffic.
The ROI for the proposed action and alternative includes controlled airspace (Moody AFB and the five
proposed transition training airports) and special use airspace used for military aircrew training (Military
Operations Areas [MOAs] and military training routes [MTRs]). For the purposes of this environmental
assessment (EA), a detailed analysis of potential impacts of the proposed action on the Moody Low
Altitude Tactical Navigation [LATN] area is not presented. This is due to the following three reasons: 1)
the proposed increase in annual sortie-operations (266) equates to an increase of only 1 sortie-operation
per day; 2) the large area that the LATN encompasses (refer to Figure 3.1-1) and the relative randomness
of aircraft operations within this large airspace (e.g., flight patterns are not confined to flight corridors and
direction of flight is not restricted) makes it difficult to determine impacts to specific resource areas; and
3) all military aircraft operations would be similar to civilian and commercial aircraft operating within the
LATN under VFR. In addition, no changes to the baseline structure or management of the LATN would
be required to support the proposed action and the airspace would be able to accommodate the proposed
increase in sortie-operations.
4.1.1
4.1.1.1
Proposed Action
MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
Under the proposed action, no change to the airspace structure associated with Moody AFB or to the ATC
procedures for its management would occur. Moody AFB aircraft would continue to follow existing
approach and departure routes and procedures, and would operate within the same airspace as they do
under baseline conditions.
Aircraft sorties at Moody AFB would increase by approximately 92 percent as a result of the proposed
beddown of T-6A aircraft (Table 4.1-1). Additionally, the number of airfield operations would increase
by approximately 254 percent (Table 4.1-2). Approximately 19 percent (3,900) of the total annual sorties
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Airspace
4-1
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
flown by T-6A aircraft would be night sorties (i.e., after 10 P.M. and before 7 A.M.). This increase in daily
and annual operations would not exceed the capacity of Moody AFB airspace. Although with
implementation of the proposed action there would be an increase in the number of aircraft sorties and
operations at Moody AFB, no changes to ATC existing departure and approach procedures would occur.
Therefore, there would be no significant impacts to ATC control operations at Moody AFB under the
proposed action.
Table 4.1-1. Proposed Changes in Annual Aircraft Sorties
Aircraft
Baseline Sorties
Proposed Sorties
Change
1,994
1,906
17,784
0
500
22,184
1,994
1,906
17,784
20,350
500
42,534
0
0
0
20,350
0
20,350
HC-130
HH-60
T-38
T-6
Transient
Total
Sources: Air Force 1998; 1999a, b.
Table 4.1-2. Proposed Changes in Annual Aircraft Operations at Moody AFB
Aircraft
HC-130
HH-60
T-38
T-6
Transient
Total
Baseline Airfield
Operations
A/D
CP
3,988
3,812
35,568
0
1,000
44,368
1,004
0
59,792
0
6,396
67,192
Proposed Airfield
Operations
A/D
CP
3,988
3,812
35,568
40,700
1,000
85,068
Change
1,004
0
59,792
244,200
6,396
311,392
A/D
CP
0
0
0
40,700
0
40,700
0
0
0
244,200
0
244,200
Notes: A/D = Approaches and Departures.
CP = Closed Pattern.
Sources: Air Force 1999a, b, h.
4.1.1.2
AIRSPACE
Under the proposed action, training operations by T-6A aircraft would occur in Moody 1, Moody 3, and
Live Oak MOAs; Visual Routes (VRs) -1065 and -1066; and within the LATN area. Additionally, T-38
aircraft would conduct operations in the Moody 2 North and South (N/S) MOAs. Annual airspace use
would increase by 21,385 sortie-operations (refer to Table 2.1-4).
MOAs. Under the proposed action, the number of sortie-operations in Moody 1, Moody 2 N/S, Moody 3,
and Live Oak MOAs would increase by 17,627 (Table 4.1-3). While an increase in sortie-operations
within the MOAs would occur under the proposed action, all sortie-operations within Moody 1, Moody 3,
and Live Oak MOAs would occur at altitudes greater than 8,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The
increased use of the MOAs under the proposed action would not affect general aviation in the region.
Additionally, existing see-and-avoid procedures and avoidance measures for civil aviation aircraft under
the MOAs would continue to occur. Military and civilian aircraft would continue to be directed beneath,
over, or around the MOA to avoid conflicts with proposed sortie-operations. The scheduling,
coordination, processes, and procedures currently used to manage these MOAs are well established and
would need no modification to support implementation of the proposed action. Therefore, no significant
impacts to MOA airspace or civilian aviation would occur under the proposed action.
4-2
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Airspace
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 4.1-3. Proposed Changes in Annual MOA Utilization
Baseline
Sortie-Operations
Day
Night
Total
Airspace
Moody 1 MOA
Moody 2 MOA
(N/S)
Moody 3 MOA
Live Oak MOA
Proposed
Sortie-Operations
Day
Night
Total
Change
Night Total
Day
5,831
860
3
97
5,834
957
19,131
980
598
97
19,729
1,077
13,300
120*
595
0
13,895
120*
2,513
8,317
7
19
2,520
8,336
4,823
9,437
133
75
4,956
9,512
2,310
1,120
126
56
2,436
1,176
Note: *Sortie-operations by T-38 aircraft only.
Sources: Air Force 1998a, b.
MTRs. Under the proposed action, the number of sortie-operations within VR-1065 and VR-1066 would
increase by 1,246 (Table 4.1-4). No changes to the baseline structure or management of VR-1065 and
VR-1066 would be required to support the proposed action. VR-1065 and VR-1066 would be able to
accommodate the proposed increase in sortie-operations. No significant impacts to MTRs would occur
under the proposed action.
Table 4.1-4. Proposed Changes in Annual MTR Utilization
Airspace
Baseline
Sortie-Operations
Day
Night
Total
Proposed
Sortie-Operations
Day
Night Total
Day
VR-1065
VR-1066
77
692
1,015
1,630
938
938
0
0
77
692
308
308
1,323
1,938
Change
Night Total
308
308
1,246
1,246
Sources: Air Force 1998a, b.
4.1.1.3
TRANSITION TRAINING AIRPORTS
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport (SGRA). Although under the proposed action airfield operations at
SGRA would increase from 115 to 156 operations per day (Table 4.1-5), this level of operations is within
tower and airport capacity and no changes to Jacksonville Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) or
existing departure and approach procedures would occur. Therefore, there would be no significant
impacts to SGRA airspace under the proposed action.
Table 4.1-5. Proposed Changes in Airport Operations at the
Transition Training Airports
Airport
Southwest Georgia Regional
Valdosta Regional
Tallahassee Regional
Lake City Municipal
Gainesville Regional
Number of Daily Airport Operations
Baseline Proposed Action
Change
115
155
330
36
222
156
196
357
52
238
41
41
27
16
16
Note: The number of daily airport operations are based on 365 flying days per year.
Valdosta Regional Airport. Under the proposed action, airfield operations at Valdosta Regional Airport
would increase by 41 operations per day to approximately 196 operations per day (Table 4.1-5) which is
within tower and airport capacity and no changes to existing departure and approach procedures would
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Airspace
4-3
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
occur. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts to Valdosta Regional Airport airspace under the
proposed action.
Tallahassee Regional Airport. Although under the proposed action airfield operations at Tallahassee
Regional Airport would increase from 330 to 357 operations per day (see Table 4.1-5), this level of
operations is within tower and airport capacity, no changes to Tallahassee Approach Control and
Jacksonville ARTCC would occur, and no changes to existing departure and approach procedures would
occur. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts to Tallahassee Regional Airport airspace under
the proposed action.
Lake City Municipal Airport. Although under the proposed action airfield operations at Lake City
Municipal Airport would increase by 16 operations per day to approximately 52 operations per day (see
Table 4.1-5), no changes to existing departure and approach procedures would occur and the ATC facility
is capable of handling the additional aircraft operations. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts
to Lake City Municipal Airport under the proposed action.
Gainesville Regional Airport. Although under the proposed action airfield operations at Gainesville
Regional Airport would increase by 16 operations per day to 238 operations per day (see Table 4.1-5),
this level of operations is within airport capacity, no changes to Gainesville Tower or Jacksonville
ARTCC would occur, and no changes to existing departure and approach procedures would occur.
Therefore, there would be no significant impacts to Gainesville Regional Airport airspace under the
proposed action.
4.1.2
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.1, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no impacts to airspace at Moody AFB,
the airspace, or the transition training airports.
4-4
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Airspace
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.2 NOISE
Noise effects in the vicinity of Moody Air Force Base (AFB) were analyzed using the NOISEMAP
(NMAP) computer model and the noise parameters contained in the program for the T-38 and T-6A
aircraft. These values were then plotted to form noise contours in 5-decibel (dB) increments ranging from
65 to 85 dB (day-night average sound level [DNL]). By comparing these contours to the baseline noise
environment, and by overlaying the contour plot on a map of the vicinity, the degree of change and the
extent of noise effects were identified.
Projected noise impacts at five proposed transition training airports were analyzed using NMAP to
calculate noise levels. Sound exposure levels (SELs) and cumulative DNL values for dominant aircraft
were calculated by using flight track information at a point 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
By comparing these levels to baseline noise levels and conditions, the degree of change and the extent of
noise effects were identified.
Projected noise levels for Military Operations Areas (MOAs) and Military Training Routes (MTRs) were
calculated using the MR_NMAP computer program (which incorporates NMAP technology). The degree
of change under the proposed action was identified by comparing changes in noise levels to baseline
levels. The noise metric used for airspace is the onset rate adjusted monthly day-night average sound
level (DNLmr).
The region of influence (ROI) for noise analysis includes the Moody AFB aerodrome, the MOAs, and
Visual Routes (VRs) proposed for use by T-6A and T-38 aircraft, and the five transition training airports
proposed for use by T-6A aircraft. Operations within the Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) area
have not been analyzed (see Section 4.1, Airspace).
4.2.1
4.2.1.1
Proposed Action
MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
Under the proposed action, the total acreage in the vicinity of Moody AFB exposed to noise levels greater
than 65 dB would decrease from baseline conditions. Figure 4.2-1 presents baseline and projected noise
contours in the vicinity of Moody AFB. Acreage exposed to noise levels between 65 dB and 85+ dB
(DNL) under baseline conditions and the proposed action is presented in Table 4.2-1.
Table 4.2-1. Noise Contour Acreage in the Vicinity of Moody AFB
Average Noise Level
(DNL)
Baseline
(acres)1
Proposed
(acres)
Change from
Baseline (acres)
% Change from
Baseline
65-70 dB
70-75 dB
75-80 dB
80-85 dB
85+
Total
2,721
1,636
800
397
632
6,186
2,508
1,230
574
373
546
5,231
-213
-406
-226
-24
-86
-955
-7.8
-24.8
-28.2
-6.0
-13.6
-15.4
Note: 1Baseline numbers represent projected conditions as analyzed for recent force structure actions (Air Force 1999a)
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Noise
4-5
N
ew
Be
the
l
122
65 65
Barretts
70
l
the
Be
70
125
nty R
C ou
d
oa
Ne w
75
75
12
85
80
80
Grand
Bay Range
85
85
Moody
Air Force
Base
80
75
To Valdosta
TN
75
80
125
221
NC
70
SC
Georgia
65
AL
Bemiss
Field
70
Bemiss
y
em
ad
MOODY
AFB
c
sA
t
igh
Kn
65
★
Atlantic
Ocean
FL
Gulf of
Mexico
LEGEND
Moody Air Force Base Boundary
65
Baseline Noise Contour and dB Value
65
Projected Noise Contour and dB Value
0
5,000
Feet
Town
Base Road
Baseline and Projected Noise Contours for Moody AFB
4-6
Figure 4.2-1
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Noise
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Although some individuals may notice an increase in the frequency of direct overflights, it is difficult to
determine noise impacts based on individual overflights due to differences in each individual’s perception
of the noise source. Scientific studies have found that DNL is the best measure for determining
community annoyance and is used to determine noise impacts from aircraft overflights.
As shown in Table 4.2-1 and Figure 4.2-1, the total acreage exposed to noise levels greater than 65 dB
would decrease from baseline conditions. As can be seen in Figure 4.2-1, a shift in T-38 operations to
runway 18R/36L caused the noise contours to shift to the east. This indicates that the noise contours are
being driven by the significantly louder (26 dB) T-38s and the addition of T-6A operations becomes
materially insignificant (Table 4.2-2). Therefore, no significant impacts to noise at Moody AFB would
occur under the proposed action.
Table 4.2-2. SELs (dB) for Baseline Aircraft and Proposed T-6A Aircraft at
Moody AFB
Distance
HH-60
T-38
HC-130
T-6A
500 feet
1,000 feet
2,000 feet
2,500 feet
8,000 feet
Knots Indicated Air Speed
Power Setting
91
87
81
79
68
140
LFO Lite1,2
113
107
101
98
83
200
100% RPM3
96
91
85
83
72
200
970 CTIT4
89
85
80
78
69
200
100% N15
Notes: SEL values calculated under standard atmospheric conditions. Due to the varying power settings and
airspeeds of aircraft, average power settings and airspeeds presented in this table represent the values used
for noise analysis of aircraft operating in the airfield environment.
1
Power setting not used to calculate SEL values for helicopters; values are based on air speed.
2
LFO = level flight operation.
3
RPM = revolutions per minute.
4
CTIT = turbine inlet temperature (degrees centigrade).
5
N1 = percentage of the Core Speed.
4.2.1.2
AIRSPACE
Under the proposed action, use of MOAs and VRs would increase. However, since the proposed sortieoperations in Moody 1, Moody 3, and the Live Oak MOAs would occur 8,000 feet above mean sea level
(MSL), noise levels associated with these MOAs are virtually indistinguishable from background noise
and are at levels where less than 3 percent of the population become highly annoyed (Finegold et al.
1994). Noise levels under both baseline and proposed conditions are less than 45 dB (DNLmr) (Table
4.2-3).
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Noise
4-7
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 4.2-3. Noise Levels in Affected Airspace under the Proposed Action
Airspace
Moody 1 MOA
Moody 2 MOA (N/S)a
Moody 3 MOA
Live Oak MOA
VR-1065
VR-1066
Baseline
DNLmr in dB
Proposed
DNLmr in dB
Change
(dB)
%
Change
< 45
48 and 47,
respectively
<45
<45
51
61
< 45
48 and 47,
respectively
<45
<45
51
61
0
< 1b and 0,
respectively
0
0
< 1b
< 1b
0
< 1b and 0,
respectively
0
0
< 1b
< 1b
Notes: aNorth and South MOAs.
b
Due to rounding, the change in dB and % change are greater than 0.
Noise levels within Moody 2 North MOA, VR-1065, and VR-1066 would increase slightly from baseline
conditions but would remain at levels where less than 8 percent of the population are expected to become
highly annoyed (Finegold et al. 1994). Maximum noise levels projected for Moody 2 North MOA and
both VRs would increase by less than 1 dB (DNLmr). Since a 5 dB change is necessary for loudness to be
noticeable (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] 1974), this increase would not be significant.
In addition, historical noise levels in these three areas have been equal to or higher than the noise levels
associated with the proposed action. Existing overflight avoidance procedures for noise sensitive areas
under the route would continue to be observed. Therefore, no significant change to noise levels
associated with the affected airspace would occur under the proposed action.
4.2.1.3
TRANSITION TRAINING AIRPORTS
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport (SGRA). Under the proposed action 15,000 annual (or 58 daily)
airfield operations would be added at SGRA increasing annual operations by 36 percent from 41,975 to
56,975. T-6A aircraft would practice approaches to the primary runway and produce SELs of 91 dB
within 1 mile from the runway (Table 4.2-4). Although some individuals may notice an increase in the
frequency of overflights, the SEL they are exposed to would be less than those currently experienced.
Due to the logarithmic nature of the dB (refer to Appendix A), the SEL of the T-6A combined with the
increase in daily T-6A operations are not high enough to effect the cumulative noise levels (DNL) in the
vicinity of SGRA. Noise levels would continue to be dominated by B-727s and B-757s operating on the
primary runway (RWY 04/22) and by C-141s on the secondary runway (RWY 34/16) (Table 4.2-4).
Therefore, with implementation of the proposed action, there would be no significant impacts to the noise
environment in the vicinity of the SGRA.
Table 4.2-4. SELs for Dominant Aircraft and T-6A and Cumulative DNLs for Each
Runway at Southwest Georgia Regional Airport
Runway
22
04
34
16
SEL (dB)
Dominant Aircraft
T-6A
Proposed Action
Proposed Action
108 (B-727)
108 (B-727)
110 (C-141)
110 (C-141)
91
91
87
-
DNL (dB)
Baseline
Proposed Action
69
69
58
56
69
69
58
56
Note: *Sound levels estimated at 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
Valdosta Regional Airport. Under the proposed action 15,000 annual (or 58 daily) airfield operations
would be added at Valdosta Regional Airport increasing annual operations by 26 percent from 56,575 to
4-8
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Noise
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
71,575. T-6A aircraft would practice approaches to the primary runway and produce a maximum SEL of
91 dB within 1 mile from the runway (Table 4.2-5). Although some individuals may notice an increase in
the frequency of overflights, the SEL they are exposed to would be less than those currently experienced.
Due to the logarithmic nature of the dB (refer to Appendix A), the SEL of the T-6A combined with the
increase in daily T-6A operations are not high enough to significantly effect the cumulative noise levels
(DNL) in the vicinity of Valdosta Regional Airport. Noise levels would continue to be below 65 dB
(DNL) and dominated by HS-748s operating on the RWYs 35/17, by UH-60s on RWY 22/04 and RWY
13, and by C-130s on RWY 31 (Table 4.2-5). Therefore, with implementation of the proposed action,
there would be no significant impacts to the noise environment in the vicinity of the Valdosta Regional
Airport.
Table 4.2-5. SELs for Dominant Aircraft and T-6A and Cumulative DNLs for Each
Runway at Valdosta Regional Airport
Runway
35
17
22
04
31
13
SEL (dB)
Dominant Aircraft
T-6A
Proposed Action
Proposed Action
96 (HS-748)
96 (HS-748)
96 (UH-60)
93 (UH-60)
93 (C-130)
93 (UH-60)
91
91
75
85
75
86
DNL (dB)
Baseline
Proposed Action
60
60
56
52
50
55
60
61
56
55
50
56
Note: *Sound levels estimated at 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
Tallahassee Regional Airport. Under the proposed action 10,000 annual (or 38 daily) airfield operations
would be added at Tallahassee Regional Airport increasing annual operations by 8 percent from 119,355
to 129,355. T-6A aircraft would practice approaches to RWY 27/09 and produce SELs of 90 dB within 1
mile from the runway (Table 4.2-6). Although some individuals may notice an increase in the frequency
of overflights, the SEL they are exposed to would be less than those currently experienced. Due to the
logarithmic nature of the dB (refer to Appendix A), the SEL of the T-6A combined with the increase in
daily T-6A operations are not high enough to effect the cumulative noise levels (DNL) in the vicinity of
Tallahassee Regional Airport. Noise levels would continue to be dominated by E-8As operating on the
RWY 27/09 and by HS-748s on RWY 18/36 (Table 4.2-6). Therefore, with implementation of the
proposed action, there would be no significant impacts to the noise environment in the vicinity of the
Tallahassee Regional Airport.
Table 4.2-6. SELs for Dominant Aircraft and T-6A and Cumulative DNLs for Each
Runway at Tallahassee Regional Airport
Runway
27
09
18
36
SEL (dB)
Dominant Aircraft
T-6A
Proposed Action
Proposed Action
113 (E-8A)
110 (E-8A)
93 (HS-748)
91 (HS-748)
90
90
82
DNL (dB)
Baseline
Proposed Action
72
70
58
59
72
70
58
59
Note: *Sound levels estimated at 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Noise
4-9
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Lake City Municipal Airport. Under the proposed action 6,000 annual (or 23 daily) airfield operations
would be added at Lake City Municipal Airport increasing annual operations from 13,140 to 19,140.
T-6A aircraft would practice approaches to the primary runway and produce SELs of 91 dB within 1 mile
from the runway (Table 4.2-7). Although some individuals may notice an increase in the frequency of
overflights, the SEL they are exposed to would be less than those currently experienced. Due to the
logarithmic nature of the dB (refer to Appendix A), the SEL of the T-6A combined with the increase in
daily T-6A operations are not high enough to effect the cumulative noise levels (DNL) in the vicinity of
Lake City Municipal Airport. Noise levels would continue to be below 65 dB (DNL) and dominated by
B-727s operating on the RWY 28/01, and DC9-10s on RWY 23 (Table 4.2-7). With implementation of
the proposed action, RWY 05 would be dominated by the T-6A aircraft but DNLs would remain well
below 65 dB. Therefore, with implementation of the proposed action, there would be no significant
impacts to the noise environment in the vicinity of the Lake City Municipal Airport.
Table 4.2-7. SELs for Dominant Aircraft and T-6A and Cumulative DNLs for Each
Runway at Lake City Municipal Airport
Runway
28
01
23
05
SEL (dB)
Dominant Aircraft
T-6A
Proposed Action
Proposed Action
111 (B-727)
111 (B-727)
88 (DC9-10)
78 (Single engine, fixed-pitch)
91
91
67
84
DNL (dB)
Baseline
Proposed Action
56
57
41
42
56
57
41
45
Note: *Sound levels estimated at 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
Gainesville Regional Airport. Under the proposed action 6,000 annual (or 23 daily) airfield operations
would be added at Gainesville Regional Airport increasing annual operations from 81,030 to 87,030.
T-6A aircraft would practice approaches to RWY 28/01 and produce SELs of 90 dB within 1 mile from
the runway (Table 4.2-8). Although some individuals may notice an increase in the frequency of
overflights, the SEL they are exposed to would be less than those currently experienced. Due to the
logarithmic nature of the dB (refer to Appendix A), the SEL of the T-6A combined with the increase in
daily T-6A operations are not high enough to effect the cumulative noise levels (DNL) in the vicinity of
Gainesville Regional Airport. Noise levels would continue to be dominated by Learjet-25s operating on
the RWY 28/01, C-9As on RWY 06, and turboprops on RWY 24 (Table 4.2-8). Therefore, with
implementation of the proposed action, there would be no significant impacts to the noise environment in
the vicinity of the Gainesville Regional Airport.
Table 4.2-8. SELs for Dominant Aircraft and T-6A and Cumulative DNLs for Each
Runway at Gainesville Regional Airport
Runway
28
01
24
06
SEL (dB)
Dominant Aircraft
T-6A
Proposed Action
Proposed Action
108 (Learjet-25)
108 (Learjet-25)
83 (Single-engine, fixed pitch)
105 (C-9A)
90
90
69
87
DNL (dB)
Baseline
Proposed Action
65
67
49
58
65
67
49
59
Note: *Sound levels estimated at 1 mile from the departure end of each runway.
4-10
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Noise
T-6A Beddown EA
4.2.2
Final
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.2, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no significant impacts due to noise at
Moody AFB, the airspace, or the transition training airports.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Noise
4-11
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.3 AIR QUALITY
The assessment of potential air quality impacts involves estimating emissions that would result from
aircraft operations and personnel changes associated with the proposed action and alternative. Air quality
impacts would be significant if emissions from the proposed action or alternative would: 1) increase
ambient air pollution concentrations above the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) or
state AAQS, 2) contribute to an existing violation of the NAAQS or state AAQS, 3) interfere with, or
delay timely attainment of the NAAQS or state AAQS, or 4) impair visibility within federally mandated
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Class I areas. A conformity analysis is required before
initiating any action that may lead to nonconformance or contribute to a violation of the NAAQS.
The approach to air quality analysis was twofold. First, emissions associated with the proposed action
and each alternative were estimated and compared to baseline conditions to assess potential exceedance of
the NAAQS or state (i.e., Georgia and Florida) AAQS. The analysis included emissions from operations
at Moody Air Force Base (AFB) (stationary and mobile sources), aircraft flying operations within the
Moody AFB aerodrome, and off-base flying operations (within Military Operations Areas [MOAs],
Visual Routes [VRs], and for each of the five transition training airports). Operations within the Low
Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) area have not been analyzed (see Section 4.1, Airspace).
Second, the Multiple-Aircraft Instantaneous Line Source (MAILS) dispersion model (Air Force 1992)
was used to estimate air pollutant concentrations for potentially affected Air Quality Control Regions
(AQCRs). MAILS is an air quality screening model that provides conservative (i.e., overestimates)
estimates of ground-level pollutant concentrations resulting from aircraft engine emissions generated
during low-altitude flights (below 3,000 feet above ground level [AGL]). To assess potential impacts,
predicted concentrations from the MAILS dispersion model were compared to existing NAAQS and
Florida AAQS.
4.3.1
4.3.1.1
Proposed Action
MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
Emission sources at Moody AFB include mobile sources such as personal vehicles, facility-based utility
vehicles and heavy equipment, stationary sources associated with aircraft and facility maintenance, and
aircraft flying operations within the Moody AFB airfield. Moody AFB is located in an area designated as
being in attainment for all NAAQS and is not in a maintenance area; a general conformity analysis is not
required. An analysis of PSD and visibility effects is also not required, since, under the proposed action,
no new stationary sources of air emissions would be constructed at Moody AFB, and no PSD Class I
areas are located near Moody AFB or proposed training locations.
Construction Emissions. Under the proposed action, construction or renovation of 11 buildings at Moody
AFB would occur (refer to Table 2.1-8). In addition, some new construction or renovation would occur
on the airfield itself to meet overall facility requirements for the beddown of T-6A aircraft.
Fugitive dust emissions as a result of new construction activity would temporarily impact local air
quality. An approximate emission factor of 1.2 tons/acre/month of activity (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency [EPA] 1999c) has been used to estimate the amount of dust emitted as a result of
renovation and construction associated with the proposed action at Moody AFB. The total area associated
with new construction under the proposed action is approximately 4,250 square feet (0.09 acres).
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Air Quality
4-13
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Assuming that all construction would be completed within 6 months, 0.7 tons of fugitive dust would be
emitted during the construction period. During proposed construction activities, best management
practices (e.g., wetting down of dirt) would be enacted to minimize potential fugitive dust emissions. As
a result of proposed construction activities there would be no significant degradation of local or regional
air quality and no new air permits would be required.
Stationary Sources. The beddown of 49 T-6A aircraft would only slightly increase stationary source
emissions at Moody AFB. Due to the fact that all T-6A engine maintenance occurs outside of hush
houses (i.e., stationary or point sources of emissions), no additional emissions from hush houses are
expected under the proposed action. However, a small increase in emissions from jet fuel evaporation
(volatile organic compounds [VOCs]) (based on JP-8 fuel evaporation rates) would occur under the
proposed action. Table 4.3-1 presents estimated emissions from stationary sources at Moody AFB under
the proposed action.
Table 4.3-1. Estimated Annual Emissions from Stationary Sources at Moody AFB
Condition
Baseline
Proposed Action
Change
CO
VOCs
132.5
132.5
0.0
61.8
62.1
0.3
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
NOx
SOx
PM10
12.5
12.5
0.0
3.4
3.4
0.0
18.0
18.0
0.0
HAPs
4.5
4.5
0.0
Aerospace Ground Equipment (AGE). Emissions from AGE are expected to increase proportionally with
the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft. The Air Force’s Air Conformity Applicability Model (ACAM)
(Air Force 1996a) was used to estimate AGE emissions. However, the T-6A is a new aircraft and is not
included in the ACAM database. Therefore, AGE emissions have been estimated using C-12 (with two
similar turboprop engines) AGE factors, and then halved to best represent AGE emissions from the
single-engine T-6A aircraft. Representative T-6A AGE emissions are presented in Table 4.3-2.
Table 4.3-2. Estimated Annual AGE Emissions at Moody AFB
Condition
Baseline
Proposed Action
Change
CO
27.4
63.0
35.6
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
4.0
9.8
5.8
6.6
30.2
23.6
3.3
5.8
2.5
PM10
3.6
7.2
3.6
Personal Vehicle Emissions. Under the proposed action, it was assumed that 1,303 base employees live
at Moody AFB (303 family housing units plus 1,000 dormitory rooms at Moody AFB). The total number
of people commuting each day would equal 2,447 (3,750 - 1,303). An increase in manpower of 444
individuals (see Table 2.1-7) would result in the increase of 370 daily trips (1.2 people per vehicle) and
1.5 million commuting miles annually (an increase of approximately 22 percent). The average vehicle
model year was assumed to be 1995. Emission factors were taken from Calculation Methods for Criteria
Air Pollutant Emission Inventories (Air Force 1994a). Annual criteria pollutant emissions as a result of
commuter traffic to and from Moody AFB under the proposed action are presented in Table 4.3-3.
4-14
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Air Quality
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 4.3-3. Estimated Annual Emissions from Personal Vehicles at Moody AFB
Condition
CO
Baseline
Proposed Action
Change
122.0
149.1
27.1
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
18.2
22.2
4.0
12.1
14.8
2.7
PM10
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
0.5
0.7
0.2
Moody Vehicle Operations. Emissions from the operation of vehicles at Moody AFB are expected to
increase proportionally with the proposed increase in Primary Aircraft Inventory (PAI) and the proposed
increase in manpower authorizations (refer to Chapter 2.0). Emission increases as a result of an increase
in manpower authorizations have been estimated using ACAM. Table 4.3-4 presents estimated emissions
from vehicle operations at Moody AFB under the proposed action.
Table 4.3-4. Estimated Annual Emissions from Facility-Based Vehicle
Operations at Moody AFB
Condition
CO
Baseline
Proposed Action
Change
75.5
128.2
52.7
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
11.6
19.7
8.1
64.4
109.0
44.6
PM10
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
4.8
8.1
3.3
Airfield Operations at Moody AFB. Baseline emissions from aircraft takeoffs and landings and closed
pattern operations at Moody AFB have been calculated using the methods described in Section 3.3. T-6A
emissions data were obtained from Pratt and Whitney Canada and used for the current analysis (Air Force
1999x). Table 4.3-5 presents estimated changes to air quality as a result of proposed aircraft operations at
Moody AFB.
Table 4.3-5. Estimated Changes in Emissions from Proposed Aircraft Operations at
Moody AFB
Aircraft Operations1
(Number of Operations)
Condition
CO
Engine Run-ups
(Not applicable)
Approaches and Departures
(85,068)
Closed Patterns
(311,392)
Baseline
Proposed Action
Baseline
Proposed Action
Baseline
Proposed Action
186.8
187.4
668.2
716.9
194.8
326.7
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
30.6
30.7
108.4
123.0
15.4
35.5
5.8
6.2
23.8
29.0
29.3
75.5
2.3
2.4
11.0
12.5
7.1
17.3
PM10
0.8
0.9
1.5
1.9
0.7
5.1
Total Baseline 1,049.8
154.4
58.9
20.4
3.0
Total Proposed Action 1,231.0
189.2
110.7
32.2
7.9
Total Change (%) 181.2 (17.3) 34.8 (22.5) 51.8 (87.9) 11.8 (57.8) 4.9 (163.3)
Notes: 1Includes operations conducted at Moody AFB by aircraft from other bases. Operations include one takeoff and one
landing. To calculate emissions, takeoffs and landings are each counted as one event.
Total Emissions. Under the proposed action, total emissions from all sources associated with the
beddown of T-6A aircraft at Moody AFB would increase from baseline conditions (Table 4.3-6).
However, total emissions at Moody AFB would not cause an exceedance of the National or Georgia
AAQS (Table 4.3-7). The proposed action would occur in an attainment area, would not be subject to
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Air Quality
4-15
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
PSD review, would not be subject to a conformity analysis, and would not expose the public or
operational personnel to hazardous levels of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). Therefore, no significant
impacts to air quality would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed action at Moody AFB.
Table 4.3-6. Total Estimated Changes in Emissions at Moody AFB under the Proposed
Action
Emission
Source
Stationary
Sources
Mobile
Sourcesb
Airfield
Operations
Condition
Baseline
Proposed Action
Baseline
Proposed Action
Baseline
Proposed Action
CO
132.5
132.5
224.9
340.3
1,049.8
1,231.0
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
PM10
61.8
62.1
33.8
51.7
154.4
189.2
12.5
12.5
83.1
154.0
58.9
110.7
3.4
3.5
3.3
5.8
20.4
32.2
18.0
18.7a
8.9
16.0
3.0
7.9
HAPs
4.5
4.5
NA
NA
NA
NA
Total Baseline 1,407.2
250.0
154.5
27.1
29.9
4.5
Total Proposed Action 1,703.8
303.0
277.2
41.5
42.6
4.5
Total Change 296.6 (21.1) 53.0 (21.2) 122.7 (79.4) 14.4 (53.1) 12.7 (42.5) < 0.1 (< 2)
Notes: aThe increase is due to fugitive dust emissions from construction and renovation activities.
b
Includes AGE and vehicle operations.
NA = not applicable.
Table 4.3-7. Estimated Total Emission Concentrations at Moody
AFB under the Proposed Action
Concentration
Georgia &
Projected
NAAQS
Increment
Criteria
Pollutant
Averaging
Period
CO
NO2
1-hour
8-hour
Annual
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
0.02 ppm
0.2 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
SO2
3-hour
0.03 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
0.14 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
0.02 ppm
0.02 ppm
0.01µg/m3
0.01µg/m3
PM10
Notes: ppm = parts per million.
µg/m3 = microgram per cubic meter
4.3.1.2
AIRSPACE
In addition to airfield operations at Moody AFB, proposed aircraft sorties would occur in Moody 1,
Moody 2 North and South (N/S) (T-38s only), Moody 3, and Live Oak MOAs; and VR-1065 and
VR-1066 (refer to Appendix B for a detailed breakdown of proposed sortie operations by airspace).
However, as discussed in Section 3.3, emissions from aircraft operating above 3,000 feet AGL are not
expected to affect surface air quality. Therefore, emissions from the Moody 1, Moody 3, and Live Oak
MOAs have not been analyzed since all aircraft operations would be conducted above 8,000 feet MSL.
Using calculation methods described in Section 3.3.2, aircraft emissions have been estimated as a
function of engine emission factors, sortie duration, altitude, and power settings. T-6A emissions data
were obtained from Pratt and Whitney Canada and used for the current analysis (Air Force 1999x). Table
4-16
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Air Quality
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.3-8 presents estimated aircraft emissions within the ROI under the proposed action. Table 4.3-9
summarizes this information by AQCR.
Table 4.3-8. Estimated Annual Airspace Emissions
Airspace1
SortieOperations
CO
1,077
1,323
1,938
4,338
1,726
2,612
12.0
9.2
60.5
81.7
68.8
12.9
Moody 2 N/S MOAs2
VR-1065
VR-1066
Total
Baseline
Change
Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOX
SOX
1.2
0.4
1.8
3.4
2.9
0.5
41.0
6.7
31.7
79.4
72.5
6.9
5.4
1.0
3.4
9.8
8.4
1.4
PM10
1.5
0.4
0.7
2.6
1.9
0.7
Notes: 1Operations in the LATN have not been included in this analysis.
2
The proposed increase in sortie-operations in the Moody 2 N/S MOAs is from T-38 aircraft only.
Table 4.3-9. Estimated Annual Airspace Emissions by AQCR
SortieOperations2
CO
5
Baseline
Proposed Action
Change
46
794
748
3.5
5.5
2.0
0.1
0.2
0.1
2.1
4.0
1.9
0.2
0.6
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.1
49
Baseline
Proposed Action
Change
1,140
2,395
1,255
50.1
57.0
6.9
2.0
2.2
0.2
47.6
51.0
3.4
5.4
6.1
0.7
1.2
1.5
0.3
54
Baseline
Proposed Action
Change
104
291
187
8.6
9.1
0.5
0.2
0.3
0.1
4.3
4.8
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
59
Baseline
Proposed Action
Change
436
858
422
6.7
10.1
3.4
0.6
0.7
0.1
18.5
19.7
1.2
2.3
2.6
0.3
0.6
0.7
0.1
1
AQCR
Condition
Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOX
SOX
PM10
Note: 1Sortie-operations in each AQCR have been determined based on percentages of each airspace within each
AQCR.
2
Operations in the LATN have not been included in emissions calculations.
Under the proposed action, emissions would increase from baseline conditions within each AQCR due to
low altitude operations. In order to assess this impact with respect to the National and Florida AAQS, the
MAILS dispersion model was used to estimate engine emission concentrations from aircraft activity
within each airspace unit. The MAILS model was used to predict the 1-hour, 3-hour, 8-hour, 24-hour,
and annual ground-level concentrations for four air pollutants: CO, NO2, SO2, and PM10. The
concentrations predicted by MAILS were compared to the National and Florida AAQS. As shown in
Table 4.3-10, MAILS verifies that air quality impacts under the proposed action would not be significant.
The only PSD Class I area that occurs within affected airspace is the northern portion of Okefenokee
National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) underlying VR-1066. Determination of the significance of an impact
on visibility within a PSD Class I area is typically associated with stationary emission sources. Since
there are no proposed activities that would increase emissions from stationary sources, no significant
impacts to air quality within airspace would occur under the proposed action.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Air Quality
4-17
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 4.3-10. Estimated Aircraft Emission Concentrations in Airspace under the
Proposed Action
Airspace
Moody 2 N/S MOAs
Criteria
Pollutant
Averaging
Period
Georgia &
NAAQS
CO
NO2
1-hour
8-hour
Annual
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
SO2
3-hour
0.03 ppm
0.02 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
NO2
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
1-hour
8-hour
Annual
0.14 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
0.10 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
SO2
3-hour
0.03 ppm
0.02 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
NO2
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
1-hour
8-hour
Annual
0.14 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
0.10 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
SO2
3-hour
0.03 ppm
0.02 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
0.14 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
0.10 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01µg/m3
PM10
CO
VR-1065
PM10
CO
VR-1066
Concentration
Florida
Projected
AAQS
Increment
PM10
Notes: ppm = parts per million.
µg/m3 = microgram per cubic meter
4.3.1.3
TRANSITION TRAINING AIRPORTS
Using emission factors (Air Force 1994a, 1999x) and proposed operations (Table 2.1-6), emissions from
aircraft operations associated with the proposed action have been estimated for each of the five transition
training airports (Tables 4.3-11 through 4.3-15).
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport (SGRA). Under the proposed action, emissions associated with
T-6A training operations at SGRA would increase from baseline conditions (Table 4.3-11). However,
total emissions would still be below de minimis levels, and the proposed action would not cause an
exceedance of the NAAQS or Georgia AAQS (Table 4.3-16). The proposed action would not occur in a
non-attainment or maintenance area, would not be subject to PSD review, would not be subject to a
conformity analysis, and would not expose the public or operational personnel to hazardous levels of
HAPs. Therefore, no significant impacts to air quality would occur as a result of implementation of the
proposed action at SGRA.
4-18
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Air Quality
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 4.3-11. Estimated Emissions from Proposed Aircraft
Operations at Southwest Georgia Regional Airport
Condition
CO
Baseline
Proposed Action
Change (%)
168.1
176.2
8.1 (4.8)
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
49.5
50.7
1.2 (2.4)
33.3
36.1
2.8 (8.4)
4.2
4.8
0.6 (14.3)
PM10
6.6
6.9
0.3 (4.5)
Note: Operations include one takeoff and one landing. To calculate emissions,
takeoffs and landings are each counted as one event.
Valdosta Regional Airport. Under the proposed action, emissions associated with T-6A training
operations at Valdosta Regional Airport would increase from baseline conditions (Table 4.3-12).
However, total emissions would still be below de minimis levels, and the proposed action would not cause
an exceedance of the NAAQS or Georgia AAQS (Table 4.3-16). The proposed action would not occur in
a non-attainment or maintenance area, would not be subject to PSD review, would not be subject to a
conformity analysis, and would not expose the public or operational personnel to hazardous levels of
HAPs. Therefore, no significant impacts to air quality would occur as a result of implementation of the
proposed action at Valdosta Regional Airport.
Table 4.3-12. Estimated Emissions from Proposed Aircraft
Operations at Valdosta Regional Airport
Condition
CO
Baseline
Proposed Action
Change (%)
118.3
126.4
8.1 (6.8)
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
36.6
37.8
1.2 (3.3)
19.0
2.9
21.8
3.5
2.8 (14.7) 0.6 (20.7)
PM10
3.8
4.1
0.3 (7.9)
Note: Operations include one takeoff and one landing. To calculate emissions,
takeoffs and landings are each counted as one event.
Tallahassee Regional Airport. Under the proposed action, emissions associated with T-6A training
operations at Tallahassee Regional Airport would increase from baseline conditions (Table 4.3-13).
However, total emissions would still be below de minimis levels, and the proposed action would not cause
an exceedance of the NAAQS or Florida AAQS (Table 4.3-16). The proposed action would not occur in
a non-attainment or maintenance area, would not be subject to PSD review, would not be subject to a
conformity analysis, and would not expose the public or operational personnel to hazardous levels of
HAPs. Therefore, no significant impacts to air quality would occur as a result of implementation of the
proposed action at Tallahassee Regional Airport.
Table 4.3-13. Estimated Emissions from Proposed Aircraft
Operations at Tallahassee Regional Airport
Condition
CO
Baseline
349.2
Proposed Action 354.6
Change (%)
5.4 (1.5)
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
135.0
135.8
0.8 (0.6)
41.0
42.9
1.9 (4.6)
7.0
7.4
0.4 (5.7)
PM10
9.8
10.0
0.2 (2.0)
Note: Operations include one takeoff and one landing. To calculate emissions,
takeoffs and landings are each counted as one event.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Air Quality
4-19
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Lake City Municipal Airport. Under the proposed action, emissions associated with T-6A training
operations at Lake City Municipal Airport would increase from baseline conditions (Table 4.3-14).
However, total emissions would still be below de minimis levels, and the proposed action would not cause
an exceedance of the NAAQS or Florida AAQS (Table 4.3-16). The proposed action would not occur in
a non-attainment or maintenance area, would not be subject to PSD review, would not be subject to a
conformity analysis, and would not expose the public or operational personnel to hazardous levels of
HAPs. Therefore, no significant impacts to air quality would occur as a result of implementation of the
proposed action.
Table 4.3-14. Estimated Emissions from Proposed Aircraft
Operations at Lake City Municipal Airport
Condition
CO
Baseline
61.7
Proposed Action
64.9
Change (%)
3.2 (5.2)
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
8.4
8.9
0.5 (5.9)
PM10
5.8
1.0
2.5
6.9
1.2
2.6
1.1 (18.9) 0.2 (20.0) 0.1 (4.0)
Note: Operations include one takeoff and one landing. To calculate emissions,
takeoffs and landings are each counted as one event.
Gainesville Regional Airport. Under the proposed action, emissions associated with T-6A training
operations at Gainesville Regional Airport would increase from baseline conditions (Table 4.3-15).
However, total emissions would still be below de minimis levels, and the proposed action AFB would not
cause an exceedance of the NAAQS or Florida AAQS (Table 4.3-16). The proposed action would not
occur in a non-attainment or maintenance area, would not be subject to PSD review, would not be subject
to a conformity analysis, and would not expose the public or operational personnel to hazardous levels of
HAPs. Therefore, no significant impacts to air quality would occur as a result of implementation of the
proposed action.
Table 4.3-15. Estimated Emissions From Proposed
Aircraft Operations at Gainesville Regional Airport
Condition
CO
Baseline
272.7
Proposed Action 275.9
Change (%)
3.2 (1.2)
Annual Emissions (tons/year)
VOCs
NOx
SOx
36.9
37.4
0.5 (1.3)
25.7
26.8
1.1 (4.3)
3.3
3.5
0.2 (6.1)
PM10
12.3
12.4
0.1 (0.8)
Note: Operations include one takeoff and one landing. To calculate emissions,
takeoffs and landings are each counted as one event.
4-20
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Air Quality
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table 4.3-16. Estimated Aircraft Emission Concentrations at the Transition
Training Airports under the Proposed Action
Transition
Training
Airport
Southwest Georgia
Criteria
Pollutant
Averaging
Period
Georgia &
NAAQS
CO
NO2
1-hour
8-hour
Annual
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
NA
NA
NA
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
SO2
3-hour
0.03 ppm
NA
< 0.01 ppm
NO2
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
1-hour
8-hour
Annual
0.14 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
SO2
3-hour
0.03 ppm
NA
< 0.01 ppm
NO2
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
1-hour
8-hour
Annual
0.14 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
NA
NA
NA
NA
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
SO2
3-hour
0.03 ppm
0.02 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
NO2
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
1-hour
8-hour
Annual
0.14 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
0.10 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
SO2
3-hour
0.03 ppm
0.02 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
NO2
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
1-hour
8-hour
Annual
0.14 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
0.10 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
35 ppm
9 ppm
0.053 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
SO2
3-hour
0.03 ppm
0.02 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
24-hour
Annual
24-hour
Annual
0.14 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
0.10 ppm
0.50 ppm
150 µg/m3
50 µg/m3
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01 ppm
< 0.01µg/m3
< 0.01µg/m3
Regional Airport
PM10
CO
Valdosta Regional
Airport
PM10
CO
Tallahassee
Regional Airport
PM10
CO
Lake City
Municipal Airport
PM10
CO
Gainesville
Concentration
Florida
Projected
AAQS
Increment
Regional Airport
PM10
Notes: ppm = parts per million; µg/m3 = microgram per cubic meter; NA = not applicable.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Air Quality
4-21
T-6A Beddown EA
4.3.2
Final
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.3, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no significant impacts to air quality at
Moody AFB, in the affected airspace, or at the proposed transition training airports.
4-22
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Air Quality
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.4 SAFETY
The following analysis assesses the potential safety impacts under the proposed action. Evaluated are the
effects of flight risks associated with military operations (e.g., aircraft mishaps and bird-aircraft strike
hazards [BASH]), fire and crash safety, and munitions storage and handling.
For the proposed action and alternative, the elements of the proposal that have a potential to affect safety
are evaluated relative to the degree to which the action increases or decreases safety risks to aircrews, the
public, and property. Analysis of flight risks correlates Class A mishap rates and BASH with projected
airspace use. When compared to similar data for baseline airspace use, assessments can be made for the
magnitude of potential safety impacts resulting from the change. Fire and crash safety are assessed
according to the potential increased risk, and the capability to manage that risk by responding to
emergencies and preventing or suppressing fires. In considering munitions and ordnance safety, projected
changes in use and handling requirements are compared to baseline uses and practices.
The Region of Influence (ROI) for the proposed action and alternative includes Moody Air Force Base
(AFB), the five proposed transition training airports, Military Operations Areas [MOAs], military training
routes [MTRs]), and the Moody Low Altitude Tactical Navigation [LATN] area.
4.4.1
4.4.1.1
Proposed Action
MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
Aircraft Mishaps. Under the proposed action, annual airfield operations at Moody AFB would increase
from 111,560 airfield operations under baseline levels to 396,460. Using a T-6A Class A mishap rate of
0.67 mishap per 100,000 flying hours, Class A mishaps at Moody AFB as a result of the proposed action
would increase slightly. Under the proposed action, T-6A aircraft would spend approximately 47,483
annual hours within Moody AFB airspace (approximately 10 minutes per operation). Therefore, the
probability of one T-6A Class A mishap occurring at Moody AFB would be one every 3.1 years.
Implementation of the proposed action would not significantly degrade aircraft safety at Moody AFB
since all safety procedures and programs would remain in force.
Accident Potential Zones (APZs). Under the proposed action, APZs would remain unchanged from
baseline conditions. APZs are not based on the number of operations or aircraft type, rather they account
for all aircraft types and operations common to military airfields. Therefore, no significant impacts to
APZs at Moody AFB would occur under the proposed action.
BASH. Under the proposed action, the increase of 255 percent in airfield operations would lead to a
proportional increase in the amount of bird-aircraft strikes. Therefore, an increase of 255 percent in
airfield operations would increase the number of bird-aircraft strikes per year at Moody AFB to 19.4 from
a baseline total of 7.6. However, no aspect of the proposed action would create or enhance locales
attractive to concentrations of birds, nor would the current flight tracks at the base change. Additionally,
Moody AFB would continue efforts to reduce bird-aircraft strikes. Therefore, no significant impacts to
bird-strike hazards at Moody AFB would occur under the proposed action.
Fire and Crash Safety. Moody AFB meets Air Force requirements for the amount and type of fire and
crash equipment as well as for the number of personnel necessary to handle an aircraft mishap. The
projected increase in airfield operations under the proposed action would not require additional staffing
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Safety
4-23
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
and equipment to respond to potential on-base fires and crashes. Therefore, no significant impacts to fire
and crash safety would occur under the proposed action.
4.4.1.2
AIRSPACE
Under the proposed action, sortie-operations would increase in all MOAs and MTRs from baseline
conditions. Using a Class A mishap rate of 0.67 mishaps per 100,000 hours flying time, Class A mishaps
within the MOAs and MTRs as a result of the proposed action would increase slightly. Under the
proposed action, T-6A aircraft would spend approximately 15,350 annual hours within the affected
airspace. Therefore, the probability of one T-6A Class A mishap occurring within MOAs, MTRs or the
LATN area would be once every 10 years.
While proposed sortie-operations in affected MOAs would predominantly occur at higher altitudes,
sortie-operations in affected MTRs would occur at lower elevations where BASH incidences are
generally higher. Adherence to the BASH Plan and use of the Bird Avoidance Model (BAM) has resulted
in a bird-aircraft strike rate of 0.7 incidents per year in affected airspace (Moody AFB 1999b, Air Force
1999z). The number of BASH incidents in the affected airspace is expected to remain low since the
proposed operations by T-6A aircraft would occur at slow speeds and low-level MTRs would be used less
often. However, as a conservative estimate, the increase of 101 percent in sortie-operations within
affected MOAs, MTRs and the LATN area would lead to a proportional increase in the amount of birdaircraft strikes. Therefore, an increase of 101 percent in airspace operations could result in approximately
1.4 bird-aircraft strikes per year within affected MOAs, MTRs, and the LATN area. This would not be a
significant impact to flight risks in the airspace associated with the proposed action.
4.4.1.3
TRANSITION TRAINING AIRPORTS
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport (SGRA). Under the proposed action, airfield operations at SGRA
would increase by 41 operations per day to approximately 156 operations per day. While under the
proposed action there would be an increase in the number of aircraft operations at SGRA, no changes to
Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility requirements, Runway Protection Zones (RPZs), or fire
and crash safety would occur. The proposed increase in aircraft operations could result in an increase in
BASH potential. Aircrews would minimize the potential risk of bird-aircraft strikes through utilization
of Moody AFB’s and SGRA’s BASH programs and the use of the BAM. Based on estimated Class A
mishap rates and proposed airfield operations, a T-6A Class A mishap could potentially occur once every
60 years. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts to SGRA safety under the proposed action.
Valdosta Regional Airport. Under the proposed action, airfield operations at Valdosta Regional Airport
would increase by 41 operations per day to approximately 196 operations per day. While under the
proposed action there would be an increase in the number of aircraft operations at Valdosta Regional
Airport, no changes to ARFF facility requirements, RPZs, or fire and crash safety would occur. The
proposed increase in aircraft operations could result in an increase in BASH potential. Aircrews would
minimize the potential risk of bird-aircraft strikes through utilization of Moody AFB’s and SGRA’s
BASH programs and the use of the BAM. Based on estimated Class A mishap rates and proposed airfield
operations, a T-6A Class A mishap could potentially occur once every 60 years. Therefore, there would
be no significant impacts to Valdosta Regional Airport safety under the proposed action.
Tallahassee Regional Airport. Under the proposed action, airfield operations at Tallahassee Regional
Airport would increase by 27 operations per day to approximately 357 operations per day. While under
the proposed action there would be an increase in the number of aircraft operations at Tallahassee
Regional Airport, no changes to ARFF facility requirements, RPZs, or fire and crash safety would occur.
4-24
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Safety
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
The proposed increase in aircraft operations could result in an increase in BASH potential. Aircrews
would minimize the potential risk of bird-aircraft strikes through utilization of Moody AFB’s and
SGRA’s BASH programs and the use of the BAM. Based on estimated Class A mishap rates and
proposed airfield operations, a T-6A Class A mishap could potentially occur once every 89 years.
Therefore, there would be no significant impacts to Tallahassee Regional Airport safety under the
proposed action.
Lake City Municipal Airport. Under the proposed action, airfield operations at Lake City Municipal
Airport would increase by 16 operations per day to approximately 52 operations per day. While under the
proposed action there would be an increase in the number of aircraft operations at Lake City Municipal
Airport, no changes to ARFF facility requirements, RPZs, or fire and crash safety would occur. The
proposed increase in aircraft operations could result in an increase in BASH potential. Aircrews would
minimize the potential risk of bird-aircraft strikes through utilization of Moody AFB’s and SGRA’s
BASH programs and the use of the BAM. Based on estimated Class A mishap rates and proposed airfield
operations, a T-6A Class A mishap could potentially occur once every 149 years at Lake City Municipal
Airport. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts to Lake City Municipal Airport safety under
the proposed action.
Gainesville Regional Airport. Under the proposed action, airfield operations at Gainesville Regional
Airport would increase by 16 operations per day to approximately 236 operations per day. While under
the proposed action there would be an increase in the number of aircraft operations at Gainesville
Regional Airport, no changes to ARFF facility requirements, RPZs, or fire and crash safety would occur.
The proposed increase in aircraft operations could result in an increase in BASH potential. Aircrews
would minimize the potential risk of bird-aircraft strikes through utilization of Moody AFB’s and
SGRA’s BASH programs and the use of the BAM. Based on estimated Class A mishap rates and
proposed airfield operations, a T-6A Class A mishap could potentially occur once every 149 years at
Gainesville Regional Airport. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts to Gainesville Regional
Airport safety under the proposed action.
4.4.2
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.4, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no impacts to safety at Moody AFB, the
airspace, or the transition training airports.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Safety
4-25
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND HAZARDOUS WASTES
Potential impacts associated with hazardous materials and wastes are based on the use, toxicity,
transportation, storage, and disposal of these substances. Hazardous materials and waste impacts result
when activities involving these substances substantially increase human health risk or environmental
exposure. Similarly, there would be an adverse impact if there is a substantial increase in the quantity or
toxicity of hazardous substances used or generated. If there is no change or reduction in the quantity and
types of hazardous substances used or generated, then there would be no change to current conditions,
i.e., no significant impacts would result.
The region of influence for hazardous materials and hazardous wastes for Moody Air Force Base (AFB)
includes the base and areas immediately surrounding the base. Although aircraft currently operate in
Military Operations Areas (MOAs) and Military Training Routes (MTRs) (e.g., Visual Routes [VRs])
proposed for use, aircraft operations would not generate or dispose of hazardous wastes in this airspace.
In addition, aircraft would not generate or dispose of hazardous materials at or in the vicinity of the
proposed transition training airports. Therefore, an analysis of hazardous materials and wastes in the
affected airspace and proposed transition training airports is not provided.
4.5.1
4.5.1.1
Proposed Action
MOODY AIR FORCE BASE AND VICINITY
Hazardous Materials
Under the proposed action, hazardous materials associated with the beddown of T-6A aircraft at Moody
AFB would include: solvents, jet fuel, oil, paints, sealants, caustics, electrical bondings, silicone grease,
hydraulic fluids, and explosives (seat-ejection system and canopy). These materials would be similar to
materials currently used by other aircraft at Moody AFB; there would not be any change in the procedures
used to manage hazardous materials at Moody AFB. Additionally, hazardous materials associated with
the beddown of T-6A aircraft at Moody AFB would be stored under applicable hazardous materials
storage regulations to minimize potential risks.
Safety procedures described in the Moody AFB Spill Prevention and Response Plan would be adhered to.
Should an accidental release or spill of hazardous substances occur, procedures within the Spill
Prevention and Response Plan would be followed to minimize potential impacts.
Older buildings that are to be demolished or renovated at Moody AFB under the proposed action could
contain asbestos. If asbestos is encountered, appropriate safety measures would be taken by Air Force
personnel to minimize potential threats to human health. Asbestos abatement would be conducted in
accordance with the Toxic Substances Control Act; no threats to human health would occur. In addition,
all debris generated from renovation and construction activities would be recycled or reused. Concrete
debris would be crushed, the rebar removed and the residual materials would be used in road
improvement projects. Any wood products would be either ground up for compost or reused if suitable
(Air Force 1999u).
Hazardous Waste
Under the proposed action, the addition of 45 T-6A aircraft at Moody AFB would increase the annual
amount of hazardous waste generated. The T-6A is a new aircraft and hazardous waste stream data do
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Wastes
4-27
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
not exist. Therefore, the annual generation of hazardous materials from T-6A aircraft has been estimated
using hazardous waste data from T-34 and T-37 aircraft; hazardous waste data from T-34 aircraft is
considered to be representative of the T-6A when T-37 hydraulic system hazardous waste data is included
(Air Force 1999p, q).
Hazardous wastes associated with T-6A aircraft would include paints, solvents, oils, stripping mixtures,
waste rags, and hydraulic fluids. Table 4.5-1 presents the types of hazardous waste associated with T-6A
aircraft, and the corresponding estimated annual amount of hazardous waste generated from 45 T-6A
aircraft.
Table 4.5-1. Annual Estimated Amount of Hazardous Wastes Generated by T-6A
Aircraft
Amount
(pounds/ year)
Type of Waste
11,250a
1,372b
12,622
T-34 Waste Generation
T-37 Hydraulic Fluid
Total
Notes: aData has been taken from T-34Cs at Whiting Naval Air Station.
b
Data has been taken from T-37s at Laughlin AFB.
Source: Air Force 1999p, q.
The proposed increase in primary aircraft inventory at Moody AFB would result in the projected addition
of approximately 12,621 pounds of hazardous wastes per year. Table 4.5-2 presents estimated annual
hazardous waste generation at Moody AFB under the proposed action. Waste generation from other
aircraft support functions has been estimated to increase proportionally with the increase in T-6A aircraft
generated waste. Hazardous waste generation from other functions is not expected to change. Under the
proposed action, the beddown of 45 T-6A aircraft at Moody AFB would result in an increase of 19
percent from baseline annual hazardous waste generation levels.
Table 4.5-2. Estimated Annual Hazardous Waste Generated at Moody AFB
under the Proposed Action
Hazardous
Waste Source (# of aircraft)
Baseline
(pounds/year)
Proposed Action
(pounds/year)
T-6A Aircraft (45)
HH-60 Helicopters (14)
HC-130 Aircraft (9)
T-38 Aircraft (57)
Other Aircraft Support Functions
Subtotal-Aircraft Support Functions
Subtotal-All Other Functions
Total
12,100
8,100
23,000
12,650
55,850
20,650
76,500
12,622
12,100
8,100
23,000
15,300
71,122
20,650
91,772
Source: Air Force 1999a.
The estimated increase in annual hazardous waste production at Moody AFB would not affect Moody
AFB’s hazardous waste generator status (the base would still be considered by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency [EPA] to be a large-quantity generator). The types of hazardous waste generated by
T-6A aircraft would be similar to waste streams associated with aircraft currently based at Moody AFB.
No additional hazardous waste storage tanks, improvements to spill containment structures, or changes to
4-28
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Wastes
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
hazardous waste disposal procedures would be required under the proposed action. If new satellite
accumulation points are found to be needed, they would be established in accordance with existing
hazardous waste management guidelines as specified in Moody AFB’s Hazardous Waste Management
Plan. Therefore, no significant impacts from hazardous materials and wastes would occur as a result of
the proposed action.
Environmental Restoration Program
Under the proposed action, the 37 identified Environmental Restoration Program (ERP) sites at Moody
AFB would not be affected. Proposed construction activities would not occur within an identified ERP
buffer zone, and therefore would not affect contaminated groundwater. In addition, any new utility
connectors or corridors (e.g., communications infrastructure) would be limited to trenches no deeper than
4 feet and would avoid any ERP sites. Therefore, no significant impacts to ERP sites would occur as a
result of the proposed action.
4.5.2
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.5, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no impacts from hazardous materials and
wastes at Moody AFB, the airspace, or the transition training airports.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Wastes
4-29
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.6 EARTH RESOURCES
The protection of unique geologic features, minimization of soil erosion, and the siting of facilities in
relation to potential geologic hazards are considered when evaluating impacts on geological resources.
Generally, such impacts can be avoided or minimized if proper construction techniques, erosion control
measures, and structural engineering measures are incorporated into project design.
The region of influence (ROI) for the proposed action consists of Moody Air Force Base (AFB) where
proposed construction and ground-disturbing activities would occur. Ground-disturbing activities would
not occur on any land under airspace unit or at any transition-training airport proposed for use under the
proposed action. Therefore, these areas are excluded from further analysis of earth resources for the
proposed action.
4.6.1
4.6.1.1
Proposed Action
MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
The construction of new facilities to support the beddown of T-6A aircraft at Moody AFB would result in
ground disturbance. Under the proposed action, proposed renovations or construction of the new facilities
would not significantly affect the geologic unit underlying Moody AFB. No unique geologic features or
geologic hazards are present on the installation. Therefore, potential impacts to earth resources would be
minimal, and no significant impacts would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed action.
The installation is primarily on a level plateau. No significant topographic features would be affected by
proposed building renovations or construction. Therefore, no significant impacts to topography would
occur as a result of implementation of the proposed action.
Soils would be disturbed during construction activities associated with the proposed facilities construction
and fiber-optic communication system installation. However, soil disturbance would primarily occur in
previously disturbed areas. Grading associated with renovation and/or construction would not require any
special construction measures (e.g., recompaction) during grading activities. Because the proposed
facilities construction would occur in an area that is relatively flat, runoff velocities would be slow. In
addition, best management practices would be implemented to minimize any potential impacts to soils.
Therefore, potential impacts to earth resources would be minimal, and no significant impacts would occur
as a result of implementation of the proposed action.
4.6.2
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.6, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no impacts to earth resources at Moody
AFB, the airspace, or the transition training airports.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Earth Resources
4-31
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.7 WATER RESOURCES
The evaluation of potential impacts to water resources considers the potential effects of implementing the
proposed action or alternative on water quality and on the hydrologic characteristics of Moody Air Force
Base (AFB) and vicinity.
4.7.1
4.7.1.1
Proposed Action
MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
Implementation of the proposed action would potentially result in a temporary increase in runoff and in
total suspended particulate matter in nearby surface water features as a result of minimal site grading
associated with facility construction. However, implementation of standard erosion control measures and
incorporation of best management practices into project design and construction would minimize runoff
and would be sufficient in minimizing construction-related sediment loading of surface waters.
Therefore, potential impacts to surface waters would be temporary, and no significant surface water
impacts would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed action.
The addition of impervious (i.e., hardened) surfaces associated with the proposed construction would be
minimal and would have no effect on groundwater resources. Ground disturbance associated with
proposed renovation and construction activities would not reach depths that would affect groundwater
resources. Therefore, no significant impacts to groundwater resources would occur as a result of
implementation of the proposed action.
Proposed construction and renovation activities would not occur within any known 100-year floodplains.
Therefore, no significant impacts to floodplains would occur as a result of implementation of the
proposed action
4.7.2
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.7, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no impacts to water resources at Moody
AFB, the airspace, or the transition training airports.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Water Resources
4-33
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.8 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
This section analyzes the potential for impacts to biological resources from implementation of the
proposed action or alternative. Impacts potentially result from the projected changes in aircraft operations
at the base and in airspace. Analysis of impacts on base focus on whether and how ground-disturbing
activities and changes in airfield operations may affect biological resources. For airspace, the analysis
emphasizes those wildlife resources that might be affected by projected changes in airspace use.
Determination of the significance of potential impacts to biological resources is based on: 1) the
importance (i.e., legal, commercial, recreational, ecological, or scientific) of the resource; 2) the
proportion of the resource that would be affected relative to its occurrence in the region; 3) the sensitivity
of the resource to proposed activities; and 4) the duration of ecological ramifications. Impacts to
biological resources are significant if species or habitats of concern are adversely affected over relatively
large areas or disturbances cause reductions in population size or distribution of a species of concern.
4.8.1
4.8.1.1
Proposed Action
MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
Vegetation and Wetlands. Construction and renovation of facilities (including installation of the fiberoptic communication system) in the cantonment area associated with the proposed action would require
vegetation removal in landscaped and previously disturbed areas. However, due to the lack of sensitive
vegetation at the proposed sites, proposed construction would not have significant impacts on vegetation.
The proposed construction activities would not occur near any delineated wetlands on Moody Air Force
Base (AFB); therefore, there would be no impacts to wetlands with implementation of the proposed
action.
Wildlife. Construction activities associated with the proposed action would temporarily displace wildlife
from suitable habitat in the immediate vicinity of the project area. Smaller, less mobile species and those
seeking refuge in burrows (e.g., gophers) could inadvertently be killed during construction activities;
however, long-term impacts to populations of such species would not result and there would be no
significant impacts to wildlife with implementation of the construction activities associated with the
proposed action.
The increase in aircraft operations at Moody AFB would not be expected to impact wildlife adversely,
either as a result of bird-aircraft strikes or changes in noise conditions. The increase in aircraft operations
would result in an average of 19 bird-aircraft strikes per year (see Section 4.4.1.1, Safety). Despite
having conducted hundreds of thousands of aircraft operations during the past 10 years, Moody AFB has
experienced an average of approximately eight bird-aircraft strikes per year.
The proposed action would result in a decrease in the area affected by noise levels of 65-85+ dB (DNL).
Because aircraft have operated at the base for more than 40 years, wildlife species at and in the vicinity of
the installation consist of those habituated to human disturbance and aircraft noise. Areas affected by
aircraft noise levels have been larger in the recent past (Air Force 1999a) than under the proposed action.
No significant impacts to wildlife were noted under these conditions (Air Force 1998a). Therefore, the
amount and change in the noise environment associated with the proposed action would not cause
abandonment of habitat by wildlife or other adverse impacts.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Biological Resources
4-35
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Parasail training (i.e., practicing parachute landings) would be conducted at Bemiss Field. Site
preparation of Bemiss Field prior to training would involve the relocation of some existing targets (i.e.,
tanks) to other locations on Bemiss Field; no other clearing or site preparation would be conducted.
Parasail training would involve towing a parasail-equipped student behind a vehicle (at a maximum speed
of 25-30 miles per hour) until the student reaches an appropriate altitude. The tow rope would then be
released and the student would practice their parachute landing skills on Bemiss Field (Air Force 1999s).
Parasail training activities at Bemiss Field associated with the proposed action may have the potential to
impact wildlife directly through injury or harassment, or indirectly through habitat alteration. All
vehicular traffic associated with parasail training exercises would remain on the central, graveled portion
of Bemiss Field. Short-term and minor impacts to wildlife may result from military personnel training at
Bemiss Field (e.g., walking or running). However, due to the short duration of parasail exercises, the
limited area at Bemiss Field in which they occur, and the location of the training activities in an area
already subjected to recurring disturbance, the proposed parasail training exercises would have no
significant impacts to wildlife at Bemiss Field.
Threatened and Endangered Species. No sensitive species are known to occur within the vicinity of the
proposed construction projects in the cantonment area of Moody AFB. Therefore, there would be no
impacts to threatened or endangered species with implementation of the construction activities associated
with the proposed action.
Indigo snakes and gopher tortoises are known to react to ground vibrations caused by human activity or
vehicles. Response to these activities by gopher tortoises may range from withdrawal into the shell to
movement from aboveground into a burrow. Indirect impacts on indigo snakes could occur if ground
vibrations affected gopher tortoises in such a way as to affect their physiology, behavior, or reproduction
and lead to degradation or abandonment of habitat essential to indigo snakes. However, gopher tortoise
colonies are known to occur near military artillery ranges, airfields, and other areas where ground
vibrations could be high (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1996). In addition, prior to any
training activities at Bemiss Field, Moody AFB Natural Resource personnel would provide appropriate
training to all personnel that would be using Bemiss Field to insure that indigo snake and gopher tortoise
(including burrows) can be recognized and left unharmed. Consequently, the Air Force believes that
implementation of the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect Federally endangered or threatened
species at Moody AFB. After consultation with the USFWS, a letter of concurrence was issued (USFWS
1999h).
4.8.1.2
AIRSPACE
Vegetation and Wetlands. No ground-disturbing activities are associated with the proposed action, so
there would be no impacts on vegetation or wetlands underlying the affected airspace.
Wildlife. The potential sources of impacts to wildlife from aircraft overflights are the visual effect of the
approaching aircraft and the associated subsonic noise. Visual impacts are not expected to be significant
because approximately 89 percent of the sortie-operations would take place at altitudes greater than 1,000
feet above ground level (AGL), which is higher than the altitude accounting for most reactions to visual
stimuli by wildlife (Lamp 1989, Bowles 1995).
Studies on the effects of noise on wildlife have been predominantly conducted on mammals and birds.
Studies of subsonic aircraft disturbances on ungulates (e.g., pronghorn, bighorn sheep, elk, and mule
deer), in both laboratory and field conditions, have shown that effects are transient and of short duration
4-36
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Biological Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
and suggest that the animals habituate to the sounds (Workman et al. 1992, Krausman et al. 1993,
Weisenberger et al. 1996). Similarly, the impacts to raptors and other birds (e.g., waterfowl) from aircraft
low-level flights were found to be brief and insignificant and not detrimental to reproductive success
(Smith et al. 1988, Lamp 1989, Ellis et al. 1991, Grubb and Bowerman 1997). Consequently, changes to
the number and types of overflights are not expected to result in significant impacts to wildlife or wildlife
populations.
With implementation of the proposed action, increases in daily sortie-operations in the MOAs would
range from less than 1 to 76. Moody 1, Moody 3, and Live Oak MOAs would experience the largest
increases in daily sortie-operations, increasing by 54, 9, and 5 sortie-operations per day. However,
aircraft activity would occur at altitudes greater than 8,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Daily
sortie-operations in Moody 2 North and South MOAs would increase by less than one sortie-operation per
day. In addition, due to the random nature of flight within the MOAs and the large area of land
overflown, the probability of an animal, nest, or other defined location experiencing overflights more than
once per day would be low. Noise levels in Moody 1, Moody 3, and Live Oak MOAs would remain
below 45 dB (DNLmr); noise levels would increase by less than 0.1 dB in Moody 2 MOA. Therefore, the
proposed changes in sortie-operations in the MOAs would not result in significant impacts to exposed
wildlife.
Daily sortie-operations in VR-1065 and VR-1066 would increase from less than one to five and from
three to seven, respectively. Although these increases would more than triple baseline use, the total
number of overflights would be low. The potential for more than one overflight of a wildlife receptor
would be low, and exposure to noise would be short in duration. In addition, the noise environment along
each of the VRs would increase by less than 0.1 dB and noise levels would continue to remain below 61
dB (DNLmr). Therefore, potential impacts to wildlife from the proposed increase in sortie-operations in
the VRs would not be significant.
Section 4.4.1.2, Safety, establishes that bird-aircraft strikes would continue to be non-existent to rare in
MOAs, MTRs, and the LATN area. Based on current bird-aircraft strike levels, the increase in sortieoperations would result in an increase of less than 0.7 bird-aircraft strikes per year.
Threatened and Endangered Species. The potential impacts from aircraft overflights in MOAs and MTRs
on threatened and endangered species are expected to be similar to those discussed previously for
wildlife. As discussed in Section 3.8, Biological Resources, bald eagles and wood storks are known to
nest under portions of the affected airspace. Nine bald eagle and seven wood stork nest sites are known to
occur beneath Moody 1, Moody 3, and Live Oak MOAs. Since all aircraft activity within these MOAs
would occur at altitudes greater than 8,000 feet MSL, there would be no effects to either of these species
with implementation of the proposed action within these MOAs.
Four bald eagle nest sites occur under VR-1065. Sortie-operations along VR-1065 would increase from
baseline levels of less than one per day to five per day. To minimize disturbance to bald eagle nest areas
and reduce potential bird-aircraft strike hazards, military aircraft would avoid nest areas by 1 mile
laterally and 1,500 feet AGL from September 15 through June 1. In addition, military aircraft would
avoid the wood stork colony to the north of Nahunta, Georgia and immediately adjacent to VR-1066 by 1
mile laterally (refer to Figure 3.8-7). Therefore, the proposed action will have no effect on bald eagles
underlying VR-1065 or the wood stork rookery adjacent to VR-1066.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Biological Resources
4-37
T-6A Beddown EA
4.8.1.3
Final
TRANSITION TRAINING AIRPORTS
No ground-disturbing activities would be associated with the proposed action at the transition training
airports. Therefore, vegetation, wetlands, and wildlife habitat would not be affected. Noise levels
associated with the proposed action would not change significantly (see Section 4.2, Noise). Therefore,
the change in the noise environment associated with the proposed action would not cause abandonment of
habitat by wildlife or other significant impacts to biological resources at the transition training airports.
4.8.2
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.8, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no impacts to biological resources at
Moody AFB, the airspace, or the transition training airports.
4-38
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Biological Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.9 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The methodology for identifying, evaluating, and mitigating impacts to cultural resources has been
established through federal laws and regulations including the National Historic Preservation Act, the
Archaeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act,
and the American Indian Religious Freedom Act.
A proposed action or alternative affects a significant resource when it alters the property’s characteristics,
including relevant features of its environment or use that qualify it as significant according to National
Register criteria. Effects may include physical destruction, damage, or alteration of all or part of the
resources; alteration of the character of the surrounding environment that contributes to the resource’s
qualifications for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); introduction of visual, audible, or
atmospheric elements that are out of character with the resource or alter its setting; or neglect of the
resource resulting in its deterioration or destruction.
Potential impacts are assessed by: 1) identifying project activities that could directly or indirectly affect a
significant resource; 2) identifying the known or expected significant resources in areas of potential
impact; and 3) determining whether a project activity would have no effect, no adverse effect, or an
adverse effect on significant resources (36 Code of Federal Regulation [CFR] 800.9). Impacts to cultural
resources may occur from changes in the setting caused by visual or audible intrusions; ground disturbing
activities such as construction; or modifications to structures.
4.9.1
4.9.1.1
Proposed Action
MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
Although implementation of the proposed action would involve building renovations, no buildings
proposed for renovations are eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. In addition, no cultural resources have
been identified in the vicinity of the proposed construction activities and the area of proposed
construction is previously disturbed. Therefore, implementation of the proposed action would result in no
significant impacts to cultural resources.
4.9.1.2
AIRSPACE
Aircraft noise and visual intrusion associated with aircraft overflights represent the primary potential
impacts to cultural resources in the affected airspace. Projected increases in sortie-operations and noise
levels within the Military Operations Areas (MOAs) and Military Training Routes (MTRs) would not
adversely affect cultural resources. For the Moody 1, Moody 3, and Live Oak MOAs, projected noise
levels with implementation of the proposed action would not increase above baseline and would remain
below 45 dB (DNLmr). While some properties listed on the NRHP underlie these MOAs, the low overall
noise levels and the high altitude (above 8,000 feet above mean sea level [MSL]) of all sortie-operations
within these MOAs would not result in the potential for adverse effects to settings. The projected noise
levels in the Moody 2 North MOA would increase by 0.1 dB (DNLmr) but would remain below 49 dB
(DNLmr) and noise levels in the Moody 2 South MOA would not increase over baseline and would remain
below 48 dB (DNLmr). This rationale would also apply to increased sortie-operations projected for the
MTRs: Visual Route (VR)-1065 and VR-1066. Noise levels on VR-1065 and VR-1066 would increase
by 0.1 dB (DNLmr) over baseline levels but would remain below 52 dB (DNLmr) on VR-1065 and below
61 0.1 dB (DNLmr) on VR-1066. No significant impacts are expected.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Cultural Resources
4-39
T-6A Beddown EA
4.9.1.3
Final
TRANSITION TRAINING AIRPORTS
The proposed action would increase aircraft operations at the five civilian airports. The surrounding
areas, however, are largely developed and accustomed to high levels of flight activity. In addition, no
cultural resources have been identified at or in the vicinity of any of the proposed transition training
airports. Therefore, implementation of the proposed action would not have a significant impact on
cultural resources at or in the vicinity of the transition training airports.
4.9.2
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.9, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no impacts to cultural resources at
Moody AFB, the airspace, or the transition training airports.
4-40
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Cultural Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.10 SOCIOECONOMICS
The significance of population and expenditure impacts are assessed in terms of their direct effects on the
local economy and related indirect effects on other socioeconomic resources (e.g., housing). The
proposed action would affect socioeconomic resources through the increase in military and civilian
personnel at Moody Air Force Base (AFB) and the resultant impacts on population, employment,
earnings, education, and housing at Moody AFB and in the vicinity.
4.10.1 Proposed Action
4.10.1.1 POPULATION
Implementation of the proposed action would increase manpower authorizations at Moody AFB from
3,306 to 3,750, an increase of 444 personnel (Table 4.10-1). Based on an average of 2.7 persons per
household in the region of influence (ROI) (U.S. Bureau of the Census [USBC] 1996), the number of
personnel and dependents associated with the base would increase from approximately 8,926 to 10,125,
or by 1,199 people. This represents a population increase in the ROI of approximately 1 percent.
Although not significant, this would generate an increase in economic activity in the ROI associated with
Moody AFB.
Table 4.10-1. Population Impacts
Estimated 1998
ROI Population1
Baseline/No-Action
Personnel2 Total Population3
123,581
3,306
Proposed Action
Personnel Total Population
8,926
3,750
10,125
Increase in
ROI (%)
1,199 (1.0)
Notes: 1ROI includes the counties of Lowndes, Lanier, Berrien, and Cook.
2
Moody AFB Manpower Authorizations.
3
Total population (Moody AFB personnel plus dependents) derived by multiplying Manpower Authorizations by 2.7.
Sources: USBC 1996, 1999a; Air Force 1998a, 1999a; Georgia Institute of Technology 1999.
4.10.1.2 EMPLOYMENT
Using multipliers discussed in Section 3.10, it is estimated that the implementation of the proposed action
would result in the addition of 134 indirect jobs in the surrounding communities (Table 4.10-2). Based on
a total work force in the ROI of 64,253 (refer Table 3.10-3), this represents an increase in employment
within the ROI of 0.2 percent. These indirect employment opportunities would not adversely impact
regional economic activity.
Table 4.10-2. Indirect Employment Impacts
Personnel
Officer
Enlisted
Civilian
Contractor
Total
No.
435
2,331
396
144
3,306
Baseline/No-Action
Factor Indirect Jobs
0.29
0.13
0.43
0.43
-
126
303
170
62
661
No.
721
2,390
399
240
3,750
Proposed Action
Factor Indirect Jobs
0.29
0.13
0.43
0.43
-
209
311
172
103
795
Change
83
8
2
41
134
Sources: Georgia Department of Labor 1999; Logistics Management Institute 1995.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Socioeconomics
4-41
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.10.1.3 EARNINGS
Implementation of the proposed action would result in the increase of approximately $13 million in
payroll disbursements in the ROI. This increase constitutes approximately 8 percent of the federal payroll
disbursements in the ROI that are a direct result of economic activity at the base.
A multiplier of 1.95 is applied to payroll disbursements to project the indirect economic affects associated
with economic activity of a given entity (refer to Section 3.10). Applying this multiplier to payroll
disbursements as a result of implementation of the proposed action, the combined (direct plus indirect)
annual economic gain resulting from the proposed action would be approximately $25 million or 9.3
percent of ROI total personal income (TPI) (Table 4.10-3). Thus, the increase of earnings would have a
beneficial impact on the ROI.
Table 4.10-3. Earnings Impacts (in millions)
ROI 1997
TPI
Baseline/No-Action
Moody AFB TPI
Proposed Action
Moody AFB TPI
Change in ROI
TPI (%)
$2,300
$189
$214
$25 (9.3)
Sources:
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) 1999; Oregon State University 1999.
4.10.1.4 EDUCATION
The ROI has an estimated 0.9 children per household (USBC 1999a). With 444 manpower authorizations
coming to Moody AFB, approximately 400 school-aged children would be introduced into the local
school districts. This would be an increase of 1.8 percent above the baseline enrollment of 21,975
students for ROI school districts (refer to Table 3.10-5). Resulting enrollments and student-to-teacher
ratios would increase by approximately 1 student per teacher. This amount would not exceed the
maximum classroom load for any grade level; therefore, no significant impact with regard to primary
educational facilities would result upon implementation of the proposed action.
In terms of funding, the increase in enrollment would equate to approximately $2.7 million more in
annual allocations. This would represent a 7 percent increase over baseline in funding for the school
districts within the ROI (Table 4.10-4). This change would not have a significant impact on education
within the ROI.
Table 4.10-4. Education Impacts
Baseline/No-Action
Total Students Funding (in millions)1
21,975
$131.9
Proposed Action
Total Students Funding (in millions)
23,552
$141.3
Change
(%)
$9.4 (7.1)
Note: 1Funding at $6,000 per student.
Sources: U.S. Department of Education 1999a, b.
4.10.1.5 HOUSING
The addition of 444 personnel under the proposed action would result in an increased housing demand
within the ROI. Most of the personnel associated with the proposed action would likely live off base.
Based on a 10 percent vacancy rate in the Moody AFB ROI (or approximately 4,231 available housing
units), adequate housing exists in the local community for personnel that would choose to live off base
(refer to Section 3.10.1.5). No significant impacts would occur.
4-42
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Socioeconomics
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.10.1.6 HEALTH SERVICES
Under the proposed action, no increase in health services would be required. Current resources have
sufficient capacity to meet the needs of the personnel associated with the proposed action. Therefore, no
significant impacts to health services would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed action.
4.10.1.7 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
No significant increases would be required from local municipal services. Current facilities and resources
are capable of meeting the demands of increases in the local population with implementation of the
proposed action. Therefore, no significant impacts to municipal services would occur.
4.10.2 No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.10, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no impacts to socioeconomics at Moody
AFB and the surrounding communities, the airspace, or transition training airports and surrounding
communities.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Socioeconomics
4-43
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
The analysis of environmental justice identifies the potential for disproportionately high and adverse
effects on minority and low-income populations. In addition, the analysis considers the environmental
health and safety risks that may disproportionately affect children upon implementation of the proposed
action or alternative.
4.11.1 Proposed Action
4.11.1.1 MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
Minority and Low-Income Populations
Implementation of the proposed action is not projected to result in adverse impacts in any resource area
that would, in turn, be expected to disproportionately affect low-income communities. Noise levels
would not disproportionately affect minority and low-income communities. Based on data presented in
Section 4.2.1.1, Noise, the area exposed to noise levels of DNL of 65-85+ dB would decrease. This
change in noise levels would not disproportionately affect minority and low-income families (refer to
Table 3.11-1).
Protection of Children
Implementation of the proposed action would not result in a change in the shape or location of safety
zones associated with the airfield complex at Moody AFB; therefore, impacts with regard to airfield
safety and aircraft mishap potential would not have the potential to disproportionately impact affected
populations of children (refer to Table 3.11-2). Further, the proposed action would not result in
substantial changes in the storage, transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and wastes associated
with operations at the base. Consequently, children would not be disproportionately exposed to increased
health or safety risks with regard to hazardous materials. No significant impacts would occur.
4.11.1.2 AIRSPACE
Under the proposed action, no significant environmental impacts would occur under the affected airspace.
There would be no changes in the use any airspace nor would there be an increase in noise levels above
baseline conditions (refer to Section 4.2.1.2); therefore, implementation of the proposed action would not
significantly impact any resource that would result in disproportionate affects on minority populations,
low-income communities (refer to Table 3.11-3), or children (refer to Table 3.11-4).
4.11.1.3 TRANSITION TRAINING AIRPORTS
Implementation of the proposed action would not result in a change in the shape or location of safety
zones associated with the proposed transition training airports; therefore, impacts with regard to airfield
safety and aircraft mishap potential would not have the potential to disproportionately impact affected
populations of children (refer to Table 3.11-5). Further, the proposed action would not result in changes
noise levels or in the storage, transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and wastes associated with
operations at each of the transition training airports. Consequently, children would not be
disproportionately exposed to increased health or safety risks with regard to hazardous materials or noise
(refer to Table 3.11-6). No significant impacts would occur.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Environmental Justice
4-45
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.11.2 No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.11, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would not be any significant impacts on any
resources that would result in disproportionate affects on minority populations, low-income communities,
or children at Moody AFB, the airspace, or transition training airports.
4-46
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Socioeconomics
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.12 LAND USE
This section focuses on land ownership or land status, general land use patterns, and land management.
Noise exposure greater than 65 decibels (dB) day-night average sound level (DNLmr) over residential
areas, public services, cultural resources, or recreational areas is considered generally unacceptable
(Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise [FICUN] 1980). Discussions of noise characteristics
and estimated noise levels associated with the baseline condition and proposed action are presented in
Sections 3.2 and 4.2, respectively.
4.12.1 Proposed Action
4.12.1.1 MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
The proposed action would require construction of new facilities and modification of existing facilities.
Potential construction and renovations would be limited to pre-developed areas and no changes to current
land use would be made. The proposed construction and renovation projects would be compatible with
current land use at the installation.
Based on the analysis presented in Section 4.2, Noise, the change in aircraft operations associated with
implementation of the proposed action would decrease areas exposed to DNL noise levels of 65-85+ dB
by 955 acres (15.4 percent) on and in the vicinity of Moody AFB (refer to Figure 4.2-1 and Table 4.2-1).
Therefore, implementation of the proposed action would not result in significant impacts to land use at
Moody AFB and the vicinity.
4.12.1.2 AIRSPACE
The proposed action would increase aircraft operations within the affected airspace. Projected increases
in sortie-operations and noise levels within the Military Operations Areas (MOAs) and Military Training
Routes (MTRs) would not adversely affect land use. For the affected airspace, projected noise levels with
implementation of the proposed action would remain below 61 dB (DNLmr). In addition, land uses under
the affected airspace have been subjected to aircraft overflights in the past. The increase in aircraft
operations from the proposed action would not introduce different impacts to current land uses.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed action would not have a significant impact.
4.12.1.3 TRANSITION TRAINING AIRPORTS
Although the proposed action would increase aircraft operations at the five civilian airports, there would
be no change in land use at or in the vicinity of these airports. The surrounding areas are already
subjected to flight activity. The introduction of T-6A aircraft would not propose any different types of
flight operations at the airports. In addition, the increase in aircraft operations and associated noise from
the proposed action would not introduce different impacts (i.e., significant increases in noise levels) to
current land uses. Therefore, implementation of the proposed action would not have a significant impact
on land use.
4.12.2 No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.12, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Land Use
4-47
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no impacts to land use issues at Moody
AFB, the airspace, or transition training airports.
4-48
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Land Use
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.13 RECREATION AND VISUAL RESOURCES
This section addresses potential effects on the use and characteristics of recreational areas and the visual
qualities of the landscape and surrounding environment. Impacts of aircraft overflights to the visual
environment of an area are difficult to quantify due to the inability to separate such impacts from the
noise of aircraft and overflights. In most instances, aircraft are not noticed because of visual cues, but
rather are noticed after being heard. The nature of the impact depends on the sensitivity of the resource
affected, the distance from which it is viewed, and the length of time it is visible. Altitude and screening
relative to the viewer also play a key role in determining impacts from aircraft overflights.
4.13.1 Proposed Action
4.13.1.1 MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
Use of recreational facilities on base and in the community of Valdosta would be expected to increase as a
result of the additional 444 manpower authorizations associated with the proposed action. On-base and
regional recreational areas have sufficient resources to accommodate the potential increase in use and
would not be significantly affected with the projected increase in personnel. Therefore, implementation
of the proposed action would have no impact on recreational resources.
4.13.1.2 AIRSPACE
Under the proposed action, aircraft operations would increase within the affected airspace. However, this
increase in aircraft operations would not significantly change the noise environment for recreation areas
underlying the affected airspace. Based upon projected noise levels (refer to Section 4.2, Noise), it would
be unlikely that recreation visitors would be able to distinguish these changes in noise levels from the
ambient noise environment.
Impacts of aircraft overflights on the visual environment of an area are difficult to quantify due to the
inability to separate such impacts from the noise of aircraft overflight. The nature of the impact depends
on the sensitivity of the resource affected, the distance from which it is viewed, and the length of time it is
visible. Potential visual impacts from aircraft overflights in Moody 1, Moody 3, and Live Oak Military
Operations Areas (MOAs) would be insignificant since all aircraft operations would occur at altitudes
greater than 8,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Overflights in the Moody 2 MOAs would be at
lower altitudes but would only increase by 120 sortie-operations per year or 1 sortie-operation every 2
days. Overflights in Visual Route (VR)-1065 and VR-1066 would increase to five and seven per day,
respectively. These small increases in overflights would not have a significant adverse effect on the
character of the underlying visual or recreational resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed
action would not have a significant impact on recreational and visual resources.
4.13.1.3 TRANSITION TRAINING AIRPORTS
Although the proposed action would increase aircraft operations at the five civilian airports, the
surrounding areas are already accustomed to high levels of flight activity. The introduction of T-6A
aircraft would not propose any new types of aircraft operations at these airports. Therefore,
implementation of the proposed action would not have a significant impact on recreational and visual
resources at or in the vicinity of the transition training airports.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Recreation and Visual Resources
4-49
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.13.2 No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline conditions, as described in Section 3.13, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, there would be no impacts to recreational and visual
resources at Moody AFB, the airspace, or transition training airports.
4-50
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Recreation and Visual Resources
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Potential transportation impacts are assessed with respect to the potential for disruption of transportation
patterns and deterioration of existing levels of service. Impacts may arise from the introduction of
construction-related traffic on local and base roads or changes in traffic volumes created by either direct
or indirect workforce and population changes. Since effects to transportation resources are generally
limited to those resulting from on-base renovation or construction activity and personnel changes.
Transportation systems beneath the airspace areas are not affected by aircraft overflights. Therefore, for
transportation resources, the region of influence (ROI) for proposed action and alternative includes
roadway networks on base and in the vicinity of Moody Air Force Base (AFB), as well as those areas
likely to be used for base access.
4.14.1 Proposed Action
4.14.1.1 MOODY AFB AND VICINITY
Construction-Related Impacts. Implementation of the proposed action would require delivery of
materials to and removal of construction-related debris from construction and renovation sites. However,
construction traffic would make up only a small portion of the total existing traffic volume in the area and
at the base. Many of the vehicles would be driven to and kept on site for the duration of construction,
resulting in very few actual increased trips. Furthermore, increases in traffic volumes associated with
construction activity would be temporary; upon completion of construction, no long-term impacts to offbase transportation systems would result.
Personnel Increases. Under the proposed action, 444 manpower authorizations would be added resulting
in a slight increase of full-time personnel reporting to work each day. About 75 percent of the personnel
at Moody AFB live off base. Assuming that the majority of full-time personnel work standard work days,
live off base, and drive individually to the installation, personnel additions with implementation of the
proposed action would result in an approximately 13 percent increase in daily commuting traffic to and
from Moody AFB. This would result in an increase in the amount of congestion that generally occurs at
the gates during the morning and evening workday rush hours. In addition, a small decrease in the
availability of parking on-base would occur due to the addition in the number of personnel. However,
historically the installation had accommodated more than 4,500 personnel (i.e., before the drawdown of
the OA/A-10s and F-16s and associated personnel [Air Force 1999a]), which is the greater than the 3,750
personnel that would be assigned to Moody AFB under the proposed action. Vehicular circulation and
available parking on the installation were adequate and accommodated the much higher number of
personnel. Therefore, implementation of the proposed action would not have a significant impact on
transportation.
4.14.2 No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft, the associated ground-based
training activities at Moody AFB, and the change in airspace utilization by T-38 aircraft would not occur.
Consequently, baseline transportation conditions, as described in Section 3.14, would remain unchanged.
Implementation of the no-action alternative would not change current activities associated with approved
force structure actions at Moody AFB; therefore, no transportation impacts would occur.
4.0 Environmental Impacts: Transportation
4-51
5.0
CUMULATIVE
EFFECTS
5.0 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
This section provides: 1) a definition of cumulative effects, 2) a description of past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable actions relevant to cumulative effects, 3) an assessment of the nature of interaction
of the proposed action with other actions, and 4) an evaluation of cumulative effects potentially resulting
from these interactions.
5.1 DEFINITION OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations stipulate that the cumulative effects analysis within
an environmental assessment (EA) should consider the potential environmental impacts resulting from
“the incremental impacts of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
future actions regardless of what agency or person undertakes such other actions” (40 Code of Federal
Regulations [CFR] 1508.7). Recent CEQ guidance in Considering Cumulative Effects under the National
Environmental Policy Act (CEQ 1997) affirms this requirement, stating that the first steps in assessing
cumulative effects involve defining the scope of the other actions and their interrelationship with the
proposed action. The scope must consider geographic and temporal overlaps among the proposed action
and other actions. It must also evaluate the nature of interactions among these actions.
Cumulative effects are most likely to arise when a relationship or synergism exists between a proposed
action and other actions expected to occur in a similar location or during a similar time period. Actions
overlapping with or in close proximity to the proposed action would be expected to have more potential
for a relationship than those more geographically separated. Similarly, actions that coincide, even
partially, in time would tend to offer a higher potential for cumulative effects.
To identify cumulative effects the analysis needs to address three fundamental questions:
5.1.1
1.
Does a relationship exist such that affected resource areas of the proposed action might
interact with the affected resource areas of past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions?
2.
If one or more of the affected resource areas of the proposed action and another action could
be expected to interact, would the proposed action affect or be affected by impacts of the
other action?
3.
If such a relationship exists, then does an assessment reveal any potentially significant
impacts not identified when the proposed action is considered alone?
Scope of Cumulative Effects Analysis
The scope of the cumulative effects analysis involves both the geographic extent of the effects and the
time frame in which the effects could be expected to occur. For this EA, the region of influence (ROI)
delimits the geographic extent of the cumulative effects analysis. The ROI includes Moody Air Force
Base (AFB) and vicinity; the horizontal boundaries of the airspace used for training, and the airspace
environment of the five civilian airports proposed for T-6A aircraft transition training. The time frame
for cumulative effects centers on the timing of the proposed action (second quarter of fiscal year 2001
[FY01/2]) and would continue into the foreseeable future.
The scope of the cumulative effects analysis also involves identifying other relevant actions in the ROI.
Beyond determining that the geographic scope and time frame for the actions interrelate to the proposed
5.0 Cumulative Effects
5-1
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
action, the analysis employs the measure of “reasonably foreseeable” to include or exclude other actions.
For the purposes of this analysis, public documents prepared by federal, state, and local government
agencies form the primary sources of information regarding reasonably foreseeable actions. Documents
used to identify other actions included environmental impact statements (EISs), EAs, management plans,
land use plans, other National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) studies, and economic and demographic
projections.
5.2 PAST, PRESENT, AND REASONABLY FORESEEABLE ACTIONS
Numerous other activities exist in the ROI. The activities described here are not completely inclusive, but
they do serve to highlight some major influences in the region and to provide perspective on the
contribution to any impacts generated by the proposed action.
5.2.1
Past Actions Relevant to the Proposed Action
Cecil Field Naval Air Station Closure. The U.S. Department of the Navy (Navy) prepared an EIS in
December 1997 that addressed the environmental issues associated with the realignment of F/A-18
aircraft (Navy 1998). As part of this realignment, Moody AFB was assigned operational control of the
Live Oak Military Operations Area (MOA). No significant environmental impacts to the airspace were
found to be created by this transfer of scheduling authority.
5.2.2
Present Actions Relevant to the Proposed Action
The following actions have been approved and are in various stages of implementation at Moody AFB.
•
Force Structure Actions. In 1998, the Air Force made the decision to implement the following force
structure changes at Moody AFB: 1) drawdown 24 A/OA-10 aircraft and 563 personnel, and
inactivate the 70th Fighter Squadron (70 FS); 2) beddown an Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals
(IFF) pilot training program, its 57 T-38 aircraft and 408 personnel, and build and renovate facilities
required to accommodate the IFF program; and 3) beddown 6 additional HH-60 helicopters and 168
personnel into the 41st Rescue Squadron (41 RQS). An EA was prepared to assess the force structure
actions, and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was signed on September 23, 1998 (Air
Force 1998a).
The findings of the EA included no significant impacts to any identified resource area. While
implementation of the action would result in long-term increases of mobile source emissions, these
increases would not produce long-term air quality degradation. Although noise levels in the
immediate vicinity of the base would increase over baseline levels, expansion of noise contours
would occur in predominantly unpopulated areas. Noise levels under the airspace areas would not
change significantly from conditions present at the time of the EA. Aircraft overflights would be of
short duration and would not significantly affect visual or recreational settings. Hazardous waste
generation on base would increase due to the addition of T-38 aircraft and HH-60 helicopters, but this
increase would be controlled and managed through existing hazardous waste management policies
and procedures. No hazardous wastes would be generated at the ranges or beneath associated
airspace areas. Geological resources, water resources, biological resources, and cultural resources
would not be significantly impacted. Construction activities would occur only within previously
developed areas on base (Air Force 1998a).
5-2
5.0 Cumulative Effects
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Ground disturbance off base would be limited to Grand Bay Range, which is currently approved for
munitions training. Wildlife occurring under the Military Training Routes (MTRs), MOAs, and the
Moody Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) area is already subject to noise from military
aircraft and would not be adversely affected. Base personnel would increase by 14 people, and
existing housing in the region would accommodate these personnel and associated dependents.
Sufficient infrastructure and service capacity, including roadway capacity, exists in the ROI to
accommodate potential growth resulting from implementation of the force structure actions. Regional
economic activity would increase slightly as a result of the proposed action (Air Force 1998a). No
present actions relative to the proposed action are ongoing at Moody AFB or in the surrounding
vicinity. The impacts of this action are reflected in the baseline conditions of this EA.
•
Temporary Use of AT-38Bs with BDU-33s. The Air Force proposed to provide temporary
(approximately 12 months) stationing of AT-38Bs at Moody AFB in order to conduct IFF training.
Approximately 9,900 inert bomb dummy units (BDU)-33 practice bombs would be used annually at
Grand Bay Range. A Categorical Exclusion (CATEX) was approved for the AT-38B action (Air
Force 1999l).
•
Air Combat Command Air Control Squadron Action. The purpose of this action is to relocate the 71st
Air Control Squadron (71 ACS) from Moody AFB due to proposed mission changes and the need to
alleviate the high stress levels on ACSs. Beginning in FY00/4, this action would result in the loss of
136 manpower authorizations, approximately 80 vehicles, and other associated equipment. This
action was approved by a CATEX (Air Force 1999d). The results of this action are reflected in the
baseline conditions of this EA.
•
State Route 125/Bemiss Road. The Georgia Department of Transportation (Georgia DOT) proposed
to widen Bemiss Road (State Route 125) along an 8.8 mile stretch from Valdosta to just north of the
Moody AFB boundary. The improvement project consists primarily of separating the existing fourlane road with a 20-foot wide, raised grass median. Left turn lanes would be constructed in the
median, including lanes providing access to the base. According to Georgia DOT, the accident rate
on this roadway is 67 percent higher than the statewide average. A CATEX was approved for this
project (Georgia DOT 1997) and the Air Force issued a Finding of No Practicable Alternative
(FONPA) (Air Force 1998b). The results of this action are reflected in the baseline conditions of this
EA.
•
Base Recovery After Attack (BRAAT) Strip Construction at Moody AFB. Moody AFB proposed to
construct a new BRAAT strip adjacent to Crash Trail 1 and use the BRAAT strip for training
purposes on a routine basis. The proposed BRAAT strip would be about 150 feet wide and 1,000 feet
long (approximately 3.5 acres) sited parallel and immediately adjacent to Crash Trail 1. The BRAAT
strip would be paved with asphalt, and a 30- by 30-foot concrete square would be included at the
center of one end of the asphalt strip. Training on the BRAAT strip would consist of Rapid Runway
Repair training conducted once per month for a maximum of 2 days during daylight hours.
Approximately 30 personnel would participate in the monthly training activities. An EA was
prepared to assess this action, and a FONSI was signed on June 17, 1999 (Air Force 1999m).
•
Compost Pad Construction at Moody AFB. Moody AFB proposed to construct a 200- by 200-foot
concrete compost pad to enhance the composting of vegetation removed during landscaping activities.
Vegetation is currently disposed of in approved landfills. By creating a compost area, the vegetation
5.0 Cumulative Effects
5-3
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
can be composted and re-used in landscaping operations, thereby reducing the amount of refuse being
placed in the landfills. The compost pad would be used daily for the disposal of vegetation removed
during landscaping activities on the installation. An EA was prepared to assess this action and a
FONSI was signed on July 12, 1999 (Air Force 1999n).
•
820th Security Forces Group (820 SFG) Move to Moody AFB. The purpose of this action is to
provide trained and equipped security forces personnel at Moody AFB to better support Combat Air
Forces. This move would locate 15 personnel and approximately 25 vehicles to the base beginning in
FY00/1. The move is in anticipation of the beddown of the full 820 SFG at a later date (see next
section, Reasonably Foreseeable Actions at Moody AFB). This proposal was approved by a CATEX
(Air Force 1999c). The results of this action have been incorporated into the baseline conditions of
this EA.
•
Drawdown of F-16 Aircraft. The Air Force is planning force structure changes to streamline fighter
squadron operations. Beginning in FY01, Moody AFB would lose 36 F-16 Block 40 Primary
Aircraft Inventory (PAI) aircraft and approximately 1,259 military manpower authorizations
associated with those aircraft. This action would primarily affect the airfield and airspace
environment (reductions in jet noise and decreases in air pollutants) and would also result in a
temporary decrease in economic activity in the local community due to the lost manpower
authorizations (Air Force 1999a). The results of this action are reflected in the baseline conditions of
this EA.
5.2.3
Reasonably Foreseeable Actions at Moody AFB (Federal Actions)
The following proposals are currently under consideration by the Air Force. Separate NEPA analysis of
each action would be conducted prior to implementation of these proposed actions.
•
Beddown of the 820th Security Forces Group. In accordance with the FY99 Force Structure
Announcement, the 820 SFG would be located at Moody AFB. Over 600 personnel authorizations
would be assigned to the base. The mission of the 820 SFG is to provide trained, equipped, and
deployable force protection to meet Air Force requirements in support of Combat Air Forces.
Renovations to existing buildings would occur as part of this proposed action. In addition, the
Bemiss Field area would be used for field training activities on a year-round basis.
5.2.4
Other Reasonably Foreseeable Actions near Moody AFB (Non-Federal Actions)
Levi-Strauss & Company, the sixth largest employer in Lowndes County, recently announced the closure
of its Valdosta facility, resulting in the loss of 837 local jobs. The loss of these jobs would likely be
offset by the otherwise steady industrial and commercial growth in Lowndes County. For example,
Lowe’s Distribution Center is expanding operations and will employ more than 350 people, and Sterling
Pulp Chemicals recently completed a new facility which will employ 25 people (Valdostaga.com 1999).
5.2.5
5.2.5.1
•
5-4
Other Federal Actions
AIR FORCE
Search and Rescue Training by HC-130 Aircraft and HH-60 Helicopters. To support search and
rescue training by the 41st and 71st Rescue Squadrons, the Air Force would establish a water training
area in the Gulf of Mexico, create three helicopter aerial refueling tracks for training and operational
5.0 Cumulative Effects
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
refueling with HC-130 aircraft, and use an existing airfield in Florida for helicopter aircrew swaps to
provide enhanced aircrew training capability in the water training area. There would be no
requirement for new facility construction or renovation or additional personnel or aircraft for Moodybased squadrons.
•
Beddown of F-22 at Tyndall AFB. Another upcoming Air Force project involves the deployment of
F-22 fighter jet aircraft, which is currently in the test and validation stage. The F-22s may eventually
replace the F-15s and would be involved in training in areas near Tyndall AFB. These areas include
the use of airspace also proposed for use by the T-6As: Tyndall B, C, and H MOAs which overlie
VR-1065; Live Oak MOA; and Moody 3 MOA. Cumulative impacts of the F-22s would be primarily
due to differences between the noise characterizations of the F-22 and F-15. The time frame for this
action is the next 5 to 10 years.
5.2.5.2
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has a major proposal to modernize and reengineer the
National Airspace Architecture. The National Airspace Architecture describes changes in
communications, navigation, surveillance, automation tools, avionics, and computers/networks. These
changes will affect flight operations over Georgia, Florida, and the Gulf of Mexico. The FAA is planning
to redesign Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCCs) to accommodate air traffic in the Jacksonville,
Miami, and Houston ARTCCs. None of these changes would affect the airspace proposed for use by
T-6A and T-38 aircraft.
While this FAA initiative is still in the planning stages, the cumulative effects to Air Force operations and
airspace management, particularly with respect to implementation of the proposed action analyzed in this
EA, remain unknown at this time. No changes in airspace boundaries are planned.
5.3 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ANALYSIS
The following discussion describes how the impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
actions might be affected by those resulting from the proposed action at Moody AFB, and whether such
relationships would result in potentially significant impacts not identified when the proposed action is
considered alone.
5.3.1
Cecil Field Naval Air Station Closure
The realignment that assigned Moody AFB operational control of the Live Oak MOA allows Moody AFB
the operational control of this airspace. No significant environmental impacts to the airspace were found
to be created by this transfer of scheduling activity.
5.3.2
Force Structure Actions
As analyzed in previous environmental documentation (Air Force 1998a), implementation of force
structure changes at Moody AFB did not result in significant environmental impacts. Compared to
baseline conditions, impacts to noise would not significantly increase with implementation of the
proposed action. Given that the proposed action would not result in significant noise impacts or other
significant impacts to environmental resources, the cumulative impacts of projected activities associated
with force structure changes at Moody AFB would not be significant. Activities associated with the
current force structure actions are ongoing at Moody AFB and will continue into FY01.
5.0 Cumulative Effects
5-5
T-6A Beddown EA
5.3.3
Final
Temporary Use of AT-38Bs with BDU-33s
A CATEX was approved for the temporary beddown of AT-38Bs at Moody AFB. This action includes
weapons delivery training at Grand Bay Range with approximately 9,900 BDU-33s dropped annually (Air
Force 1999l). As stated in the CATEX, implementation of this action would not result in any significant
environmental impacts. This action, when combined with the proposed action, would not result in a
significant cumulative impact to any resource area. This action would occur in FY00/4 but would only
occur if the T-38Cs are not yet available.
5.3.4
ACC Air Control Squadron Action
A CATEX was approved for the relocation of 136 manpower authorizations and approximately 80
vehicles from Moody AFB (Air Force 1999d). As stated in the CATEX, implementation of this action
would not result in significant environmental impacts. This action, when combined with the proposed
action, would not result in a significant cumulative impact to any resource area. This action would occur
in FY00/4.
5.3.5
State Route 125/Bemiss Road
A CATEX was approved by the Georgia DOT and the Air Force issued a FONPA for the widening of
Bemiss Road (State Route 125) from Valdosta to just north of Moody AFB (Georgia DOT 1997, Air
Force 1998b). As stated in the CATEX, implementation of this action would not result in significant
environmental impacts. This action, when combined with the proposed action, would not result in a
significant cumulative impact on any resource area. The widening of Bemiss Road could improve the
traffic circulation conditions for personnel entering and departing Moody AFB. Specific dates for this
action have not yet been established.
5.3.6
BRAAT Strip Construction
The proposed construction and use of a new BRAAT strip would result in the paving of approximately
3.5 acres and the addition of training activities once per month to this area of Moody AFB (Air Force
1999m). Moody AFB can easily accommodate this additional limited volume of activity. The magnitude
of the action is minimal, and proposed construction associated with the BRAAT strip would affect a very
specific area. Given that the proposed action would have a minimal effect within the base, the combined
impacts of both actions would not result in significant cumulative impacts to any resource area.
5.3.7
Compost Pad Construction
The proposed construction of a 200- by 200-foot concrete compost pad on Moody AFB would result in
the paving of approximately 1 acre (Air Force 1999n). Given the small project size and minimal
environmental effects, the combined impact of the proposed T-6A beddown would not result in
significant cumulative impacts to any resource area.
5.3.8
Beddown of the 820 SFG
The proposed beddown of the 820 SFG would involve field and classroom training at Moody AFB and
would not involve any airspace or airfield operations. Although not fully analyzed, it is anticipated that
the construction and renovation projects, the use of the Bemiss Field area for field training activities, or
5-6
5.0 Cumulative Effects
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
the addition of the 620 personnel associated with the 820 SFG beddown would not result in significant
impacts in any resource area, individually or cumulatively.
5.3.9
F-16 Drawdown
The proposed deactivation of the 68 FS and 69 FS would result in the loss of approximately 1,259
military manpower authorizations (Air Force 1999a). Potential reductions in earnings, employment, and
community activity that would result from implementation of the proposed F-16 drawdown would be
partially offset with implementation of the beddown of the T-6A and associated ground-based training
activities due to the increase in personnel and associated economic impact. The combined impact of both
actions would not result in significant cumulative impacts to any resource area.
5.4 SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
In summary, none of the projected impacts of the proposed action are individually significant. The
incremental contribution of impacts of the proposed action, when considered in combination with other
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions would not be significant. Overall impacts to
socioeconomics would be beneficial with implementation of the proposed action. Implementation of the
beddown of T-6A aircraft and the associated ground-based training activities at Moody AFB would help
restore manpower authorizations that would be lost as a result of the drawdown of the F-16 squadrons and
would serve as an economic stimulus to the local community.
As shown in Figure 5.1-1, the cumulative effects of the proposed and reasonably foreseeable actions at
Moody AFB would create an overall balance in the total number of personnel assigned to Moody AFB.
Over the timeframe from FY99/4 to FY02/1, total personnel numbers would vary from 3,306 to 4,589.
However, final projected personnel numbers would stabilize to approximately 4,372 by FY01/4 if all
actions were implemented.
5.0 Cumulative Effects
5-7
3,000
Enlisted
Total
Total
Enlisted
Enlisted
Total
Total
Enlisted
4,000
Officer
Enlisted
Civilian
Contractor
TOTAL
Contractor
Civilian
Officer
Contractor
Civilian
Officer
Contractor
,,,
,,,
,,,
Current Conditions
0
Civilian
Civilian
Contractor
1,000
Officer
2,000
Officer
MANPOWER AUTHORIZATIONS
5,000
,,,
,,,
,,,,
,,,,,,,
F-16 Drawdown
,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,,,
820 SFG Beddown
,,
,,,,
,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,
T-6A Beddown
(FY99/4)
(FY01/2)
(FY01/3)
(FY02/1)
484
3,710
395
0
4,589
435
2,331
396
144
3,306
465
2,917
400
144
3,926
751
2,978
403
240
4,372
Total
140
120
HC-130
HH-60
A/OA-10
F-16
T-38
T-6
TOTAL
(FY99/4)
F-16 Drawdown
(FY01/2)
9
14
12
36
0
0
71
9
14
0
0
54
0
77
F-16
HH-60
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
A/OA-10
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
HC-130
F-16
A/OA-10
HH-60
HC-130
T-6
T-38
T-38
0
A/OA-10
20
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
Current Conditions
HH-60
40
,,
,,
T-6
F-16
60
T-6
80
T-38
Total
Total
100
HC-130
PRIMARY AIRCRAFT INVENTORY (PAI)
Manpower Authorizations
T-6A Beddown
(FY02/1)
9
14
0
0
54
38
115
Primary Aircraft Inventory
Cumulative Effects: Manpower Authorizations and Primary Aircraft Inventory
5-8
Figure 5.1-1
5.0 Cumulative Effects
6.0
IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE
COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
6.0 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE
COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that environmental analysis include
identification of “…any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved
in the proposed action should it be implemented.” Irreversible and irretrievable resource commitments
are related to the use of non-renewable resources and the effects that the uses of these resources have on
future generations. Irreversible effects primarily result from the use or destruction of a specific resource
(e.g., energy and minerals) that cannot be replaced within a reasonable time frame and could have been
used for other purposes. Irretrievable resource commitments involve the loss in value of an affected
resource that cannot be restored as a result of the action (e.g., the disturbance of a cultural site).
For the proposed action, most resource commitments are neither irreversible nor irretrievable. Most
impacts are short-term and temporary, or long lasting but not significant. Those limited resources that
may involve a possible irreversible or irretrievable commitment under the proposed action are discussed
below.
Under the proposed action, renovation and construction of on-base facilities would require the
consumption of limited amounts of materials typically associated with interior renovations (e.g., wiring,
insulation, windows, etc.) and construction (e.g., concrete, sand, bricks, steel, etc.) An undetermined
amount of energy to conduct renovations, construction, and operations of these facilities would be
expended and irreversibly lost. All construction debris would be recycled or reused where practicable.
Facilities proposed for construction do not have any cultural significance.
The proposed action and alternatives would require fuels used by aircraft and surface vehicles. The flight
activities associated with the proposed beddown of T-6A aircraft at Moody Air Force Base (AFB) or the
use of airspace (Moody 2 Military Operations Area [MOA]) by Moody-based T-38 aircraft would result
in fuel use for as long as the programs continued. Since flight activities would increase relative to
baseline, total fuel use would increase. Fuel use by surface vehicles supporting aircraft maintenance and
operations would also increase relative to baseline; therefore, total fuel consumption would increase and
this nonrenewable resource considered irreversibly lost.
Use of personal vehicles by personnel associated with the proposed T-6A beddown would result in the
consumption of additional fuel, oil, and lubricants. Since personnel numbers would increase relative to
baseline, total fuel, oil, and lubricant use would increase and these nonrenewable resources considered
irreversibly lost.
Implementation of the proposed action or alternative would not result in the destruction of environmental
resources. Further, the proposed action would not adversely affect the biodiversity of Moody AFB or the
areas located beneath the airspace proposed for use. No wildlife habitat at Moody AFB or under the
airspace proposed for use would be lost as a result of implementation of the proposed action. Therefore,
there would be no irretrievable commitment of this resource.
6.0 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources
6-1
7.0
REFERENCES
7.0 REFERENCES
Air Education and Training Command (AETC) and Chief of Naval Air Training. 1998. Syllabus of
Instruction: T-6 Joint Primary Pilot Training. Prepared by FlightSafety Services Corporation,
Englewood, CO, for Raytheon Aircraft Company, Wichita, KS. 15 July.
Air Force. See U.S. Department of the Air Force.
Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. 1999. Alabama Federally Listed
Endangered/Threatened Species (current as of 15 June 1999). Personal Communication via Email, B. McCollum, Biologist. 25 August.
Alabama Natural Heritage Program (Alabama NHP). 1999. “The Natural Heritage Network:
Standardized Data on Endangered Species and Communities.”
http://www.heritage.tnc.org/nhp/us/al/ftplist.html. 24 August.
Army. See U.S. Department of the Army.
Bailey, R.G., P.E. Avers, T. King, and W.H. McNab. 1994. Ecoregions and Subregions of the United
States. Prepared in Cooperation with the ECOMAP Team of the Forest Service and U.S.
Geological Survey. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC.
Bowles, A.E. 1995. Responses of Wildlife to Noise. Pages 109-156 in R.L. Knight, and K.J. Gutzwiller,
eds. Wildlife and Recreationists: Coexistence Through Management and Research. Island Press,
Covelo, CA.
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). 1999. “BEA Regional Facts (BEARFACTS): Georgia 1996-97.”
http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional. 12 July.
City of Lake City. 1996. Lake City Municipal Airport Master Plan Update. Lake City, FL. December.
City of Tallahassee. 1996. Tallahassee Regional Airport Master Plan Update. Prepared by Avcon, Inc.
January.
Conant, R., and J.T. Collins. 1991. Reptiles and Amphibians: Eastern/Central North America. Peterson
Field Guide Series, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA.
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects under the National
Environmental Policy Act. Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC.
Department of Defense (DoD). 1995. “DefenseLink, News Release, Office of Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Public Affairs): Air Force Selects Beech Aircraft Corporation of Wichita, Kansas, to
Develop the Joint Primary Aircraft Training System.”
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun1995/b062295_bt345-95.html. 19 May.
7.0 References
7-1
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Ellis, D.H., C.H. Ellis, and D.P. Mindell. 1991. Raptor Responses to Low-level Jet Aircraft and Sonic
Booms. Environmental Pollution 74:53-83.
EPA. See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 1999. “Discussion Paper on Runway Protection Zones for
Airports.” http://www.faa.gov/arp/ace/611/611rpz.htm. Last Revised 22 Oct 96. 12 December.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1982. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Lowndes
County, Georgia. Panel 50 of 200. Community Panel Number 130469-0050-B.
Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON). 1992. Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport
Noise Analysis Issues. Washington, DC. August.
Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise (FICUN). 1980. Guidelines for Considering Noise in
Land Use Planning and Control. U.S. Department of Transportation. Washington, DC.
Finegold, L.S., C.S. Harris, and H.E. von Gierke. 1994. Community Annoyance and Sleep Disturbance:
Updated Criteria for Assessing the Impacts of General Transportation Noise on People. Noise
Control Engineering Journal 42:January-February.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 1999a. “Recreation and Parks.”
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/parks/.
———. 1999b. “Air Pollution Control – General Provisions. Chapter 62-204.”
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/ogc/documents/rules/rulelistpa.html#air. 24 June.
Florida Division of Forestry. 1999. “State Forests.” http://www.fl-dof.com/Fm/stforest/index.html.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC). 1999. “Florida’s Endangered Species,
Threatened Species and Species of Special Concern: Official Lists. August 1, 1997.”
http://www.state.fl.us/fwc/pubs/endanger.html. 12 September.
Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI). 1999. “Florida Natural Inventory: Species and Natural
Community Summaries.” http://www.fnai.org/cntylist.htm. 24 August.
Gainesville Regional Airport. 1999a. Personal Communication via Telephone. V. Jackson, Station Six
Fire Department, Gainesville Regional Airport, Gainesville, FL. 13 September.
———. 1999b. Personal Communication via Fax. T. Fisher, Operations Manager, Gainesville-Alachua
County Regional Airport Authority, Gainesville, FL. 15 September.
———. 1999c. Personal Communication via Telephone. T. Fisher, Operations Manager, GainesvilleAlachua County Regional Airport Authority, Gainesville, FL. 18 October.
Georgia Department of Community Affairs. 1999. “Individual Community Profiles 1998: Lowndes
County and Valdosta.” http://www.dca.state.ga.us/commind/Sel2.asp. 28 June.
7-2
7.0 References
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Georgia Department of Labor. 1999. “Georgia Department of Labor – Labor Market Information
Publications: Civilian Labor Force Estimates.” http://www.dol.state.ga.us/1mi/LMI_docs.htm.
28 June.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GDNR). 1999. “Georgia State Parks and Historic Sites.”
http://www.ganet.org/dnr/parks.
Georgia Institute of Technology. 1999. “Georgia Demographic Data: Total Population 1980 and 1990,
1997 Estimates, 2000 and 2010 Projections.” http://sdrcnt.pp.gatech.edu/gacen9.htm. 28 June.
Georgia Department of Transportation (Georgia DOT). 1997. State Route 125/Bemiss Road Categorical
Exclusion. Project No. STP-034-1(22). November.
Georgia Natural Heritage Program (Georgia NHP). 1999. Rare Natural Elements in Georgia Natural
Heritage Data Base. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Social Circle. 31 March.
Grubb, T.G., and W.W. Bowerman. 1997. Variations in Breeding Bald Eagle Responses to Jets, Light
Planes and Helicopters. Journal of Raptor Research 31:213-222.
Hall, L.S., P.R. Krausman, and M.L. Morrison. 1997. The Habitat Concept and a Plea for Standard
Terminology. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25:173-182.
Krausman, P.R., M.C. Wallace, D.W. DeYoung, M.E. Weisenberger, and C.L. Hayes. 1993. The effects
of low-altitude jet aircraft on desert ungulates. International Congress: Noise as a Public Health
Problem 6:471-478.
Lake City Municipal Airport. 1999. Personal Communication via Telephone. E. Levers, Airport
Manager, Lake City, FL. 13 September.
Lamp, R.E. 1989. Monitoring the Effect of Military Air Operations at Naval Air Station Fallon on the
Biota of Nevada. Nevada Department of Wildlife, Reno.
Logistics Management Institute. 1995. Economic Impact Database, Installations and Indirect/Induced
Job Multipliers. McLean, VA.
McNab, W.H., and P.E. Avers., compilers. 1994. Ecological Subregions of the United States: Section
Descriptions. Administrative Publication WO-WSA-5. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Washington, DC.
Moody Air Force Base (Moody AFB). 1994. Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan, Moody
Air Force Base, GA. September.
———. 1995. Threatened and Endangered Species Survey, Moody Air Force Base, Georgia. October.
———. 1996. 347 WG Plan 91-202, Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard Plan. Moody AFB, GA. 18 October.
7.0 References
7-3
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
———. 1997a. Spill Prevention and Response Plan for Moody Air Force Base. Moody AFB, GA.
March.
———. 1997b. Cultural Resources Management Plan for Moody Air Force Base, GA. March.
———. 1998. Moody AFB Hazardous Waste Management Plan. 347th Wing, CES/CEV, Moody AFB,
Georgia. December.
———. 1999a. Personal Communication. C. Herring, Chief, Housing Management Flight. 347
CES/CEH, Moody AFB, GA. 27 May.
———. 1999b. Moody AFB BASH Data. 347th Wing, Flight Safety Office, Moody AFB, GA. 28 May.
National Center for Education Statistics. 1999. “Common Core of Data (CCD): Information on Public
Schools and School Districts in the United States.” http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/ccdschool1998.html. 8
September.
National Park Service. 1997. “Calabasas Landfill Special Use Permit Environmental Assessment.”
http://www.nps.gov/planning/samo/cala/.
———. 1999. “National Register Information System.” http://www.nr.nps.gov. 15 September.
Navy. See U.S. Department of the Navy.
Oregon State University. 1999. “Government Information Sharing Project, Regional Economic
Information System: 1969-1997.” http://goveinfo.kerr.orst.edu. 13 July.
Palis, J.G. 1997. Species Profile: Flatwoods Salamander (Ambystoma cingulatum) on Military
Installations in the Southeastern United States. Technical Report SERDP-97-6, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Waterway Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Pecan Row Municipal Solid Waste Landfill. 1999. Personal Communication via Telephone. G. Walks,
Landfill Manager, Valdosta, GA. 11 October.
Raytheon Aircraft. 1997. “Press Releases: Backgrounder – T-6A Texan II Special Features.”
http://www.raytheon.com/rac/press/111997a.htm. 20 July 1999.
———. 1999. “Military & Special Missions: T-6A Texan II Training System.”
http://raytheon.com/rac/t6a/t6a.htm. 19 May.
Smith, D.G., D.H. Ellis, and T.H. Johnson. 1988. Raptors and aircraft. Pages 360-367 in R.L. Glinski,
B.G. Pendleton, M.B. Moss, M.N. LeFranc, Jr., B.A. Millsaop, and S.W. Hoffman, eds.
Proceedings of the Southwest Raptor Management Symposium and Workshop. National Wildlife
Federation, Washington, DC.
South Georgia Regional Development Center. 1999. Personal Communication via Telephone. D.
Sutton, Regional Planner. Valdosta, GA. 4 August.
7-4
7.0 References
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport (SGRA). 1998. Master Plan Update. Prepared for AlbanyDougherty Aviation Commission, Albany, GA. December.
———. 1999. Personal Communication via Telephone. R. Howell, Director. Albany, GA. 13
September.
Tallahassee Regional Airport. 1999. Personal Communication via Telephone. D. Pollard,
Superintendent of Airport Operations, Tallahassee, FL. 13 September.
Tallahassee Regional Airport Fire Department. 1999. Personal Communication via Telephone. Mike
Ruffini, Deputy Fire Chief, Tallahassee, FL. 19 October.
The Nature Conservancy (TNC). 1994. Moody Air Force Base Natural Heritage Inventory Draft Final
Report. Prepared for Headquarters 347th Logistics Group, Moody AFB, GA by Special Projects
Office, Pembroke, GA. October.
———. 1996. Species and Natural Communities of Concern on U.S. Air Force Lands. An Installation
Specific Handbook for Moody Air Force Base. Prepared for the U.S. Air Force by the Georgia
Natural Heritage Program. May.
TIMCO, Inc. 1999. Personal Communication via Telephone. B. Hendrik, Flight Operations, Lake City,
FL. 13 September.
U.S. Air Force Safety Center. 1999. “Annual Aircraft Statistics, Flight Safety Information Page.”
http://www-afsc.saia.af.mil/AFSC/RDBMS/Flight/stats.
U.S. Bureau of the Census (USBC). 1993. 1990 Census of Population: General Population
Characteristics. U.S. Department of Commerce, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
———. 1996. “USA Counties 1996, General Profile: Lowndes, GA.”
http://www.census.gov/statab/USA96/13/185.txt. 13 July.
———. 1999a. County Population Estimates for July 1, 1998 and Population Change for July 1, 1997 to
July 1, 1998: Georgia.” http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/county/co-981/98C1_13.txt. 22 April.
———. 1999b. “1996 County Business Patterns for Lowndes, GA.”
http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/map/96data/13/185.TXT. 22 April.
———. 1999c. “1990 U.S. Census Data, Summary Level: State-County.”
http://venus.census.gov/cdrom/lookup.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1979. Soil Survey of Lowndes County, GA. Soil
Conservation Service. August.
7.0 References
7-5
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
U.S. Department of Education. 1999a. “Information on Public Schools and School Districts in the
United States.” http://nces.ed.gov/ccdweb/school/district.asp.
———. 1999b. “Public Elementary and Secondary School Revenues and Expenditures, by State.”
http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/stfis.html.
U.S. Department of the Air Force (Air Force). 1992. Multiple-Aircraft Instantaneous Line Source
Dispersion Model Users Guide. ESL-TR-89-59. Air Force Engineering and Services Center,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TN.
———. 1994a. Calculation Methods for Criteria Air Pollutant Emission Inventories. Air Force Material
Command, Brooks AFB, TX. July.
———. 1994b. AICUZ Study, Volumes I – III, Moody Air Force Base, GA. March.
———. 1995a. Environmental Assessment: Joint Primary Aircraft Training System (JPATS). Prepared
for U.S. Air Force Program Executive Office, Bombers, Missiles, and Trainers (AFPEO/ST),
Washington, DC, in Cooperation with U.S. Navy Program Executive Office, Training System
Program Manager (PM8-273), Arlington, VA. May.
———. 1995b. U.S. Air Force Air Conformity Guide. HQ USAF/CEV. Washington, DC. August.
———. 1995c. Air Force Instruction 32-7061: The Environmental Impact Analysis Process. Civil
Engineering. Secretary of the Air Force, Washington, DC. 24 January.
———. 1996a. Air Conformity Applicability Model, Version 2.0 Pro. Air Force Safety Center.
Albuquerque, NM. May
———. 1996b. Biological Assessment of Threatened and Endangered Species: Bemiss Field Drop
Zone, Moody Air Force Base, Georgia. 347 CES/CEV, Moody Air Force Base, GA. August.
———. 1996c. Relocation of the 41st and 71st Air Rescue Squadrons to Moody AFB, Georgia. Final
Environmental Assessment. Prepared for Air Combat Command, Langley, VA. July.
———. 1997a. Environmental Assessment, Mission Changes Randolph Air Force Base, Texas. Air
Education and Training Command. May.
———. 1997b. Interim Guide for Environmental Justice Analysis with the Environmental Impact
Analysis Process. Washington, DC. November.
———. 1998a. Force Structure Actions at Moody Air Force Base, Georgia. Final Environmental
Assessment. Prepared for Air Combat Command, Langley, VA. September.
———. 1998b. Finding of No Practicable Alternative for the Bemiss Road Widening Project, Moody
AFB, GA. Reference to Georgia Department of Transportation Project No. STP-034-1(22). 27
August.
7-6
7.0 References
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
———. 1999a. F-16 Drawdown at Moody AFB, Georgia. Final Environmental Assessment. Prepared
for Air Combat Command, Langley AFB, VA. September.
———. 1999b. AETC Base X Proposal. Request for Environmental Analysis to HQ AETC/CEV from
HQ AETC/XPRF, LtCol Van Wickler. 9 February.
———. 1999c. 820 SFG Detachment Move to Moody AFB, Georgia. Request for Environmental
Analysis to ACC/CEV from HQ AF/XOFX (Maj C. Rice). CATEX. 29 April.
———. 1999d. ACC Air Control Squadron Action – Moody AFB, Georgia. Request for Environmental
Analysis to ACC/CEV from ACC/XPX (Maj Bob Alton, XPXB). CATEX. 22 April.
———. 1999e. Personal Communication via E-mail. Maj James Beamon, F-22/T-6/T-38C Beddown
Program Manager, HQ AETC/XPPB, Randolph AFB, TX. 19 August.
———. 1999f. Personal Communication via E-mail. Maj John Thompson, AETC/XPRF, Randolph
AFB, TX. 30 July.
———. 1999g. Personal Communication via E-mail. Linda DeVine, Project Manager, HQ ACC/CEVP,
Langley AFB, VA. 10 August.
———. 1999h. Personal Communication via Telephone. Maj John Thompson, JPATS Air Vehicle
Program Manager, HQ AETC/XPRF, Randolph AFB, TX. 2 September.
———. 1999i. Personal Communication via E-mail. Carl Lanz, 347 CES/CEV, Moody AFB, GA. 4
August.
———. 1999j. Personal Communication via E-mail. Greg Lee, Natural Resource Specialist, 347
CES/CEV, Moody AFB, GA. July.
———. 1999k. General Plan, Moody Air Force Base, Georgia.
———. 1999l. Temporary Use of AT-38s with BDU-33s at Grand Bay Range. AF Form 813: Request
for Environmental Impact Analysis. CATEX. Prepared for ACC/CEV by Maj. S. Carpenter, HQ
AETC/DOFF. 16 June.
———. 1999m. Base Recovery After Attack (BRAAT) Strip Construction Finding of No Significant
Impact. Moody AFB, GA. Signed by Col. S.D. Alerman, Chairperson, 347 WG Environmental
Protection Committee. 17 June.
———. 1999n. Compost Pad Construction Finding of No Significant Impact. Moody AFB, GA.
Signed by Col. S.D. Alerman, Chairperson, 347 WG Environmental Protection Committee. 12
July.
7.0 References
7-7
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
———. 1999o. 1997 Air Emissions Inventory Report for Moody Air Force Base (MAFB) Valdosta,
Georgia. Prepared for 347 CES/CEV, Moody AFB, Georgia, and DET 1 HSC/OEBQ, Brooks
AFB, TX. February.
———. 1999p. Personal Communication via E-mail. Jaime Agudelo, Environmental Engineer,
Randolph AFB, TX. 23 August.
———. 1999q. Personal Communication via Telephone. Ron Stabler, Materials Specialist, Whiting
Naval Air Station, FL. 9 September.
———. 1999r. Personal Communication via Letter. Eric Newsome, Chief, Environmental Restoration,
Langley AFB, VA. 24 September.
———. 1999s. Personal Communication via E-mail. Col Britten Marlowe, Chief, Aerospace
Physiology Division, Office of the Command Surgeon, HQ AETC, Randolph AFB, TX. 1
October.
———. 1999t. Personal Communication via E-mail. Maj Mark Beauchemin, HQ AETC/DOFI,
Randolph AFB, TX. 4 October.
———. 1999u. Personal Communication via E-mail. Tim Bottomley, Environmental Flight Chief
(Acting), 347 CES/CEV, Moody AFB, GA. 6 October.
———. 1999v. Personal Communication via E-mail. Maj John Thompson, JPATS Air Vehicle
Program Manager, HQ AETC/XPRF, Randolph AFB, TX. 14 June.
———. 1999w. Personal Communication via E-mail. Tim Bottomley, Environmental Flight Chief
(Acting), 347 CES/CEV, Moody AFB, GA. 2 August.
———. 1999x. Personal Communication via E-mail. Karl Heidrich, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH. 29
April.
———. 1999y. Personal Communication via E-mail. 1Lt Curtis Burney, BASH Team, HQ
AFSC/SEFW, Kirtland AFB, NM. 6 October.
————. 1999z. “Bird Avoidance Model.” http://www-afsc.saia.af.mil/AFSC/Bash/conus_home.html.
17 September.
U.S. Department of the Army (Army). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. Vicksburg, MS. January.
______. 1999. Survey of Historic Buildings and Structures at Moody Air Force Base, Lowndes and
Lanier Counties, Georgia. Prepared for Corps of Engineers, Savannah District, Savannah
District, GA. November.
7-8
7.0 References
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
U.S. Department of the Navy (Navy). 1998. Environmental Impact Statement for Disposal and Reuse of
Naval Air Station Cecil Field, Jacksonville, Florida. Prepared for Southern Division, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command. October.
———. 1999. “NAVICP Fleet: T-6A Texan II.” http://www.navicp.navy.mil/03/0313/t6a.htm. 19
May.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1972. Report to the President and Congress on Noise.
Senate Report No. 92-63. Washington, DC. February.
———. 1974. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect the Public Health and
Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. Report 550/9-74-004. March.
———. 1992. Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation. Volume IV: Mobile Sources. Office of
Air and Radiation, Office of Mobile Sources. Ann Arbor, MI.
———. 1999a. "Watershed Information Profile". http://www.epa.gov/surf2/hucs/03110201/. 7 August.
———. 1999b. “National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).”
http://www.epa.gov/airs/criteria.html.
———. 1999c. “AP 42. Section13.2.” http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42c13.html. August.
———. 1999d. “USA Air Quality Nonattainment Areas.” http://www.epa.gov/airs/nonattn.html. 9
December.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1996. Biological Opinion on the Proposed Bemiss Field Drop
Zone at Moody Air Force Base, Georgia. FWS Log 4-4-96-457. Brunswick, GA. December.
———. 1998. GIS Database of Bald Eagle and Wood Stork Nest Sites. Jacksonville, FL.
———. 1999a. Threatened, Endangered, and other Special-Status Species Likely to Occur in the Florida
Panhandle. Panama City, FL. February.
———. 1999b. “Jacksonville, Florida, Ecological Services Field Office: Endangered Species in North
Florida Counties.” http://www.fws.gov/r4jafl/federal1.htm. 2 September.
———. 1999c. “Listed Species in Georgia (State and Federal).”
http://www.fws.gov/r4gafo/countyfr.html. 1 September.
———. 1999d. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule to Remove the American
Peregrine Falcon from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, and to Remove
the Similarity of Appearance Provision for Free-Flying Peregrines in the Conterminous United
States. Federal Register 64:46542-46558.
———. 1999e. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule to List the Flatwoods
Salamander as a Threatened Species. Federal Register 64:15691-15704.
7.0 References
7-9
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
———. 1999f. “National Wildlife Refuge System, Refuge System Information Search Page”
http://refuges.fws.gov/NWRSFiles/General/Query.html.
———. 1999g. Personal Communication via letter from Larry Goldman, Field Supervisor, Daphne,
Alabama to Roy Barker, HQ ACC/CEVP, Langley AFB, Virginia. Federally-listed Species
Which Occur in Covington and Henry Counties, Alabama. 2 November.
———. 1999h. Personal Communication via Letter, Re: FWS Log # 00-0574. Sandra Tucker, Field
Supervisor, Athens, Georgia. 21 December.
University of Dayton Research Institute. 1999. OMEGA Version 11.3 Compute Runup Noise Measure
Data for Military Aircraft. Developed by University of Dayton Research Institute for U.S. Air
Force AL/OEBN, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH.
Valdostaga.com. 1999. “Valdosta & Lowndes County, Georgia, USA: Facts and Statistics.”
http://www.valdostaga.com/facts.html. 12 July.
Valdosta – Lowndes County Airport Authority. 1992. Final Valdosta Regional Airport Master Plan
Development Study. September.
Valdosta Regional Airport. 1999. Personal Communication via Telephone. B. Ator, Airport Manager,
Valdosta, GA. 13 September.
Weisenberger, M.E., P.R. Krausman, M.C. Wallace, D.W. DeYoung, and O.E. Maughan. 1996. Effects
of Simulated Jet Aircraft Noise on Heart Rate and Behavior of Desert Ungulates. Journal of
Wildlife Management 60:52-61.
Workman, G.W., T.D. Bunch, J.W. Call, R.C. Evans, L.S. Neilson, and E.M. Rawlings. 1992. Sonic
Boom/Animal Disturbance Studies on Pronghorn Antelope, Rocky Mountain Elk, and Bighorn
Sheep. Utah State University Foundation, Logan. Prepared for USAF, Hill AFB, Contract
F42650-87-C-0349.
Watts, R. 1998. Hazardous Materials and Wastes. Prentice Hall, New York.
7-10
7.0 References
8.0
PERSONS
CONTACTED
8.0 PERSONS CONTACTED
Agudelo, J. Environmental Engineer, Randolph AFB, TX.
Ator, B. Airport Manager, Valdosta Regional Airport, Valdosta, GA.
Beamon, Maj J. F-22/T-6/T-38C Beddown Program Manager, HQ AETC/XPPB, Randolph AFB, TX.
Beauchemin, Maj M. HQ AETC/DOFI, Randolph AFB, TX.
Bottomley, T. Environmental Flight Chief (Acting), 347 CES/CEV, Moody AFB, GA.
Bryan, W. 347 CES/CEC, Moody AFB, GA.
Burney, 1Lt C. USAF BASH Team, HQ AFSC/SEFW, Kirtland AFB, NM.
DeVine, L. Project Manager, HQ ACC/CEVP, Langley AFB, VA.
Eggleston, G. Tower Chief, Valdosta Regional Airport, Valdosta, GA.
Farringer, R. HQ AETC/CEVN, Randolph AFB, TX.
Fisher, T. Operations Manager, Gainesville-Alachua County Regional Airport Authority, Gainesville,
FL.
Heidrich, K. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH.
Hendrik, B. Flight Operations, TIMCO, Inc., Lake City, FL.
Herring, C. Chief, Housing Management Flight. 347 CES/CEH, Moody AFB, GA.
Howell, R. Director, Southwest Georgia Regional Airport, Albany, GA.
Jackson, V. Station Six Fire Department, Gainesville Regional Airport, Gainesville, FL.
Lanz, C. 347 CES/CEV, Moody AFB, GA.
Lee, G. Natural Resources Specialist, 347 CES/CEV, Moody AFB, GA.
Levers, E. Airport Manager, Lake City Municipal Airport, Lake City, FL.
McCollum, B. Biologist, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Montgomery,
AL.
Pollard, D. Superintendent of Airport Operations, Tallahassee Regional Airport, Tallahassee, FL.
Ruffini, M. Deputy Fire Chief, Tallahassee Regional Airport Fire Department, Tallahassee, FL.
Stabler, R. Materials Specialist, Whiting Naval Air Station, FL.
8.0 Persons Contacted
8-1
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Sutton, D. Regional Planner, South Georgia Regional Development Center, Valdosta, GA.
Thompson, Maj J. AETC/XPRF, Randolph AFB, TX.
Windler, Maj P. USAF BASH Team, HQ AFSC/SEFW, Kirtland AFB, NM.
8-2
8.0 Persons Contacted
9.0
LIST OF
PREPARERS
9.0 LIST OF PREPARERS
P. AMBLE, TECHNICAL REVIEW AND OVERSIGHT, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMPANY, INC. (TEC)
B.A., Physical Geography
Years of Experience: 11
E. BECKER, TECHNICAL REVIEW AND OVERSIGHT, TEC
M.A., Physical Geography/Marine Resources Emphasis
Years of Experience: 16
W. HALPERIN, PROJECT DIRECTOR, TEC
Ph.D., Geography
Years of Experience: 18
T. MACDONALD, LAND USE, EARTH RESOURCES, RECREATION AND VISUAL RESOURCES,
SOCIOECONOMICS, TRANSPORTATION, CULTURAL RESOURCES, TEC
M.A., Geography and Planning
Years of Experience: 4
D. MILLER, NOISE ANALYSIS, SUBCONSULTANT
B.S., Math
Years of Experience: 25
W. MITCHELL, GIS, TEC
M.S., Geographic and Cartographic Sciences
Years of Experience: 5
R. PINGREE, WATER RESOURCES, NOISE, AIR QUALITY, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND HAZARDOUS
WASTES, TEC
M.S., Environmental Science and Management
Years of Experience: 1
P. SAGE, PROGRAM MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR, TEC
M.A., Business and Public Administration
Years of Experience: 25
R. SPAULDING, PROJECT MANAGER, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, TEC
M.S., Wildlife and Fisheries Science
Years of Experience: 13
D. STITES, GRAPHICS, TEC
A.A., Geology
Years of Experience: 17
K. WALLER, QUALITY ASSURANCE, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, TEC
B.S., Public and Environmental Affairs
Years of Experience: 11
W. WEAR, AIRSPACE, SAFETY, TEC
M.A., Public Administration
Years of Experience: 29
9.0 List of Preparers
9-1
A PPENDIX A
AIRCRAFT
NOISE ANALYSIS
APPENDIX A: AIRCRAFT NOISE ANALYSIS
A.1
NOISE
Appendix A presents a detailed discussion of noise and its effects on people and the environment. An
assessment of aircraft noise requires a general understanding of how sound is measured and how it affects
people in the natural environment. The purpose of this appendix is to address public concerns regarding
aircraft noise impacts.
Section A.1.1 is a general discussion on the properties of noise. Section A.1.2 summarizes the noise
metrics discussed throughout this environmental assessment (EA). Section A.1.3 provides federal landuse compatibility guidelines that are used in applying aircraft noise impacts to land use planning in the
airport environment. Section A.2 addresses public concerns on potential impacts such as hearing loss,
nonauditory health effects, annoyance, speech interference, sleep interference, and noise effects on
livestock and wildlife.
A.1.1
General
Noise, often defined as unwanted sound, is one of the most common environmental issues associated with
aircraft operations. Of course, aircraft are not the only sources of noise in an urban or suburban
surrounding, where interstate and local roadway traffic, rail, industrial, and neighborhood sources also
intrude on the everyday quality of life. Nevertheless, aircraft are readily identifiable to those affected by
their noise and are typically singled out for special attention and criticism. Consequently, aircraft noise
problems often dominate analyses of environmental impacts.
Sound is a physical phenomenon consisting of minute vibrations which travel through a medium, such as
air, and are sensed by the human ear. Whether that sound is interpreted as pleasant or unpleasant depends
largely on the listener's current activity, past experience, and attitude toward the source of that sound. It
is often true that one person's music is another person's noise.
The measurement and human perception of sound involves two basic physical characteristics: intensity
and frequency or pitch. Intensity is a measure of the acoustic energy of the sound vibrations and is
expressed in terms of sound pressure. The higher the sound pressure, the more energy carried by the
sound and the louder the perception of that sound. The second important physical characteristic is sound
frequency which is the number of times per second the air vibrates or oscillates. Low-frequency sounds
are characterized as rumbles or roars, while high-frequency sounds are typified by sirens or screeches.
The loudest sounds which can be detected comfortably by the human ear have intensities which are
1,000,000,000,000 times larger than those of sounds which can just be detected. Because of this vast
range, any attempt to represent the intensity of sound using a linear scale becomes very unwieldy. As a
result, a logarithmic unit known as the decibel (dB) is used to represent the intensity of a sound. Such a
representation is called a sound level.
Because of the logarithmic nature of the decibel unit, sound levels cannot be added or subtracted directly
and are somewhat cumbersome to handle mathematically. However, some simple rules of thumb are
useful in dealing with sound levels. First, if a sound's intensity is doubled, the sound level increases by
3 dB, regardless of the initial sound level. For example:
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
A-1
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
60 dB + 60 dB = 63 dB, and
80 dB + 80 dB = 83 dB
The total sound level produced by two sounds of different levels is usually only slightly more than the
higher of the two. For example:
60.0 dB + 70.0 dB = 70.4 dB
Because the addition of sound levels behaves differently than that of ordinary numbers, such addition is
often referred to as “decibel addition” or “energy addition.” The latter term arises from the fact that what
we are really doing when we add decibel values is first converting each decibel value to its corresponding
acoustic energy, then adding the energies using the normal rules of addition, and finally converting the
total energy back to its decibel equivalent.
An important facet of decibel addition arises later when the concept of time-average sound levels is
introduced to explain Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL). Because of the logarithmic units, the
time-average sound level is dominated by the louder levels that occur during the averaging period. As a
simple example, consider a sound level which is 100 dB and lasts for 30 seconds, followed by a sound
level of 50 dB which also lasts for 30 seconds. The time-average sound level over the total 60-second
period is 97 dB, not 75 dB.
A sound level of 0 dB is approximately the threshold of human hearing and is barely audible under
extremely quiet listening conditions. Normal speech has a sound level of approximately 60 dB. Sound
levels above about 120 dB begin to be felt inside the human ear as discomfort and eventually pain at still
higher levels.
The minimum change in the time-average sound level of individual events which an average human ear
can detect is about 3 dB. A change in sound level of about 10 dB is usually perceived by the average
person as a doubling (or halving) of the sound's loudness, and this relation holds true for loud sounds and
for quieter sounds.
Sound frequency is pitch measured in terms of hertz (Hz). The normal human ear can detect sounds
which range in frequency from about 20 Hz to about 15,000 Hz. All sounds in this wide range of
frequencies, however, are not heard equally well by the human ear, which is most sensitive to frequencies
in the 1,000 to 4,000 Hz range. To account for the varied frequency sensitivity of people, we use the
A-weighted scale that approximates the average, healthy human ear. The A-weighting de-emphasizes the
low and high frequency portion of the noise signal and emphasizes the mid-frequency portion.
Sound levels measured using A-weighting are most properly called A-weighted sound levels while sound
levels measured without any frequency weighting are most properly called sound levels. However, since
most environmental impact analysis documents deal only with A-weighted sound levels, the adjective
“A-weighted” is often omitted, and A-weighted sound levels are referred to simply as sound levels. In
some instances, the author will indicate that the levels have been A-weighted by using the abbreviation
dBA or dB(A), rather than the abbreviation dB, for decibel. As long as the use of A-weighting is
understood to be used, there is no difference implied by the terms “sound level” and “A-weighted sound
level” or by the units dB, dBA, and dB(A). The A-weighting function de-emphasizes higher and
especially lower frequencies to which humans are less sensitive. Because the A-weighting is closely
A-2
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
related to human hearing characteristics, it is appropriate to use A-weighted sound levels when assessing
potential noise effects on humans and many terrestrial wildlife species. In this document, all sound levels
are A-weighted and are reported in dB.
Sound levels do not represent instantaneous measurements but rather averages over short periods of time.
Two measurement time periods are most common – 1 second and 1/8 of a second. A measured sound
level averaged over 1 second is called a slow response sound level; one averaged over 1/8 of a second is
called a fast response sound level. Most environmental noise studies use slow response measurements,
and the adjective “slow response” is usually omitted. It is easy to understand why the proper descriptor
“slow response A-weighted sound level” is usually shortened to “sound level” in environmental impact
analysis documents.
A.1.2
Noise Metrics
A “metric” is defined as something “of, involving, or used in measurement.” As used in environmental
noise analyses, a metric refers to the unit or quantity which quantitatively measures the effect of noise on
the environment. Noise studies have typically involved a confusing proliferation of noise metrics as
individual researchers have attempted to understand and represent the effects of noise. As a result, past
literature describing environmental noise or environmental noise abatement has included many different
metrics. Recently, however, various federal agencies involved in environmental noise mitigation have
agreed on common metrics for environmental impact analysis documents, and both the Department of
Defense (DoD) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have specified those which should be
used for federal aviation noise assessments. These metrics are as follows.
A.1.2.1
MAXIMUM SOUND LEVEL
The highest A-weighted sound level measured during a single event in which the sound level changes
value as time goes on (e.g., an aircraft overflight) is called the maximum A-weighted sound level or
maximum sound level, for short. It is usually abbreviated by ALM, Lmax, or LAmax. The typical
A-weighted levels of common sounds are shown in Figure A-1. The maximum sound level is important
in judging the interference caused by a noise event with conversation, TV or radio listening, sleep, or
other common activities.
A.1.2.2
SOUND EXPOSURE LEVEL
Individual time-varying noise events have two main characteristics: 1) a sound level which changes
throughout the event, and 2) a period of time during which the event is heard. Although the maximum
sound level, described above, provides some measure of the intrusiveness of the event, it alone does not
completely describe the total event. The period of time during which the sound is heard is also
significant. The sound exposure level (abbreviated SEL or LAE) combines both of these characteristics
into a single metric.
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Appendix
A-3
COMMON
SOUNDS
LOUDNESS
(Compared to 70 dBA)
SOUND LEVEL
(dBA)
130
Oxygen Torch
120
Discotheque
Textile Mill
110
100
Uncomfortable
16 Times as Loud
Very Loud
4 Times as Loud
90
Garbage Disposal
80
Moderate
Heavy Truck at 50 Feet
Vacuum Cleaner at 10 Feet
32 Times as Loud
70
Automobile at 100 Feet
Air Conditioner at 100 Feet
60
Quiet Urban Daytime
50
1/4 as Loud
Quiet
Quiet Urban Nighttime
40
Bedroom at Night
30
1/16 as Loud
20
Recording Studio
Just
10
Audible
Threshold of Hearing
0
Source: Harris 1979.
Examples of Typical Sound Levels in the Environment
A-4
Figure A-1
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Sound exposure level is a logarithmic measure of the total acoustic energy transmitted to the listener
during the event. Mathematically, it represents the sound level of the constant sound that would, in one
second, generate the same acoustic energy as did the actual time-varying noise event. Since aircraft
overflights usually last longer than one second, the SEL of an overflight is usually greater than the
maximum sound level of the overflight.
Sound exposure level is a composite metric which represents both the intensity of a sound and its
duration. It does not directly represent the sound level heard at any given time, but rather provides a
measure of the net impact of the entire acoustic event. It has been well established in the scientific
community that SEL measures this impact much more reliably than just the maximum sound level.
Because the SEL and the maximum sound level are both A-weighted sound levels expressed in dBs, there
is sometimes confusion between the two, so the specific metric used should be clearly stated.
A.1.2.3
DAY-NIGHT AVERAGE SOUND LEVEL
Time-average sound levels are the measurements of sound levels which are averaged over a specified
length of time. These levels provide a measure of the average sound energy during the measurement
period.
For the evaluation of community noise effects, and particularly aircraft noise effects, the day-night
average sound level (abbreviated DNL or Ldn) is used. Day-night average sound level averages aircraft
sound levels at a location over a complete 24-hour period, with a 10-dB adjustment added to those noise
events which take place between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 aq.m. (local time) the following morning. This 10dB “penalty” represents the added intrusiveness of sounds which occur during normal sleeping hours,
both because of the increased sensitivity to noise during those hours and because ambient sound levels
during nighttime are typically about 10 dB lower than during daytime hours.
Ignoring the 10-dB nighttime adjustment for the moment, DNL may be thought of as the continuous
A-weighted sound level which would be present if all of the variations in sound level which occur over a
24-hour period were smoothed out so as to contain the same total sound energy.
Day-night average sound level provides a single measure of overall noise impact, but does not provide
specific information on the number of noise events or the individual sound levels which occur during the
day. For example, a DNL of 65 dB could result from a very few noisy events, or a large number of
quieter events.
As noted earlier for SEL, DNL does not represent the sound level heard at any particular time, but rather
represents the total sound exposure. Scientific studies and social surveys which have been conducted to
appraise community annoyance to all types of environmental noise have found the DNL to be the best
measure of that annoyance. Its use is endorsed by the scientific community (American National
Standards Institute [ANSI] 1980, 1988; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] 1974; Federal
Interagency Committee on Urban Noise [FICUN] 1980; Federal Interagency Committee on Noise
[FICON] 1992).
There is, in fact, a remarkable consistency in the results of attitudinal surveys about aircraft noise
conducted in different countries to find the percentages of groups of people who express various degrees
of annoyance when exposed to different levels of DNL. This is illustrated in Figure A-2, which
summarizes the results of a large number of social surveys relating community responses to various types
of noises, measured in DNL.
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Appendix
A-5
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Figure A-2 is taken from Schultz (1978) and shows the original curve fit. A more recent study has
reaffirmed this relationship (Fidell et al. 1991). Figure A-3 shows an updated form of the curve fit
(Finegold et al. 1992) in comparison with the original. The updated fit, which does not differ
substantially from the original, is the current preferred form. In general, correlation coefficients of 0.85 to
0.95 are found between the percentages of groups of people highly annoyed and the level of average noise
exposure. The correlation coefficients for the annoyance of individuals are relatively low, however, on
the order of 0.5 or less. This is not surprising, considering the varying personal factors which influence
the manner in which individuals react to noise. Nevertheless, findings substantiate that community
annoyance to aircraft noise is represented quite reliably using DNL.
This relation between community annoyance and time-average sound level has been confirmed, even for
infrequent aircraft noise events. A NASA study (Fields and Powell 1985) reported the reactions of
individuals in a community to daily helicopter overflights, ranging from 1 to 32 per day. The stated
reactions to infrequent helicopter overflights correlated quite well with the daily time-average sound
levels over this range of numbers of daily noise events.
The use of DNL has been criticized recently as not accurately representing community annoyance and
land-use compatibility with aircraft noise. Much of that criticism stems from a lack of understanding of
the basis for the measurement or calculation of DNL . One frequent criticism is based on the inherent
feeling that people react more to single noise events and not as much to “meaningless” time-average
sound levels.
Time-average noise metric, such as DNL, takes into account both the noise levels of all individual events
which occur during a 24-hour period and the number of times those events occur. As described briefly
above, the logarithmic nature of the decibel unit causes the noise levels of the loudest events to control
the 24-hour average.
As a simple example of this characteristic, consider a case in which only one aircraft overflight occurs in
daytime during a 24-hour period, creating a sound level of 100 dB for 30 seconds. During the remaining
23 hours, 59 minutes, and 30 seconds of the day, the ambient sound level is 50 dB. The DNL for this
24-hour period is 65.5 dB. Assume, as a second example, that 10 such 30-second overflights occur in
daytime hours during the next 24-hour period, with the same ambient sound level of 50 dB during the
remaining 23 hours and 55 minutes of the day. The DNL for this 24-hour period is 75.4 dB. Clearly, the
averaging of noise over a 24-hour period does not ignore the louder single events and tends to emphasize
both the sound levels and number of events. This is the basic concept of a time-average sound metric,
and specifically the DNL.
A-6
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
Highly Annoyed (%)
100
2
90
% HA - 0.8553 L dn- 0.0401 L dn + 0.00047 L dn
80
All 161 Data Points
Given Equal Weight
70
3
All Surveys
Given Equal Weight
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
DNL (dB)
Figure A-2. Community Surveys of Noise Annoyance (Schultz 1978).
100
USAF (Finegold et al. 1992) Data = 400 Points
% HA = 100/[1 + EXP (11.13 - 0.141 L dn )]
80
Schultz (1978) Data = 161 Points
% HA = 100/[1 + EXP (10.43 - 0.132 L dn )]
60
40
20
Day-Night Average
Sound Level in dB
Calculated
% HA Points
0
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
USAF
0.41 0.83 1.66 3.31 6.48 12.3 22.1 36.5 53.7 70.2 82.6
Schultz
0.58 1.11 2.12 4.03 7.52 13.6 23.3 37.1 53.3 68.8 81.0
Figure A-3. Response of Communities to Noise (Finegold et al. 1994).
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
A-7
T-6A Beddown EA
A.1.3
Final
Land-Use Compatibility
As noted above, the inherent variability between individuals makes it impossible to predict accurately
how any individual will react to a given noise event. Nevertheless, when a community is considered as a
whole, its overall reaction to noise can be represented with a high degree of confidence. As described
above, the best noise exposure metric for this correlation is the DNL. In June 1980, an ad hoc Federal
Interagency Committee on Urban Noise (FICUN) published guidelines for considering noise in land use
planning (FICUN 1980). These guidelines related DNL to compatible land uses in urban areas. The
committee was composed of representatives from the DoD, Department of Transportation, Department of
Housing and Urban Development; the EPA; and the Veterans Administration. Since the issuance of these
guidelines, federal agencies have generally adopted these guidelines to make recommendations to the
local communites on land use compatibilities.
The FAA included the committee’s guidelines in the Federal Aviation Regulations (Harris 1984). These
guidelines are reprinted in Table A-1, along with the explanatory notes included in the regulation.
Although these guidelines are not mandatory (see Notes in Table A-1), they provide the best means for
evaluating noise impact in airport communities. In general, residential land uses normally are not
compatible with outdoor DNL (Ldn values) above 65 dB, and the extent of land areas and populations
exposed to DNL of 65 dB and higher provides the best means for assessing the noise impacts of
alternative aircraft actions.
In 1990, the FICON was formed to review the manner in which aviation noise effects are assessed and
presented. This group released its report in 1992 and reaffirmed the use of DNL as the best metric for this
purpose (FICON 1992).
Analyses of aircraft noise impacts and compatible land uses around DoD facilities are normally made
using NOISEMAP (Moulton 1992). This computer-based program calculates DNL at many points on the
ground around an airfield and draws contours of equal levels for overlay onto land-use maps of the same
scale. The program mathematically calculates the DNL of all aircraft operations for a 24-hour period,
taking into consideration the number and types of aircraft, their flight paths and engine thrust settings, and
the time of day (daytime or nighttime) that each operation occurs.
Day-night average sound levels may also be measured directly around an airfield, rather than calculated
with NOISEMAP; however, the direct measurement of annualized DNL is difficult and costly since it
requires year-round monitoring or careful seasonal sampling.
NOISEMAP provides an accurate projection of aircraft noise around airfields. NOISEMAP also has the
flexibility of calculating sound levels at any specified ground location so that noise levels at
representative points under flight paths can be ascertained. NOISEMAP is most accurate for comparing
“before and after” noise impacts which would result from proposed airfield changes or alternative noise
control actions, so long as the various impacts are calculated in a consistent manner.
A-8
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table A-1. Land Use Compatibility with Yearly Day-Night Average Sound Levels
Land Use
Residential
Residential, other than mobile homes & transient
lodgings
Mobile home parks
Transient lodgings
Public Use
Schools
Hospitals and nursing homes
Churches, auditoria, and concert halls
Government services
Transportation
Parking
Commercial Use
Offices, business and professional
Wholesale and retail – building materials, hardware, and
farm equipment
Retail trade – general
Utilities
Communication
Manufacturing and Production
Manufacturing, general
Photographic and optical
Agriculture (except livestock) and forestry
Livestock farming and breeding
Mining, fishing, resource production and extraction
Recreational
Outdoor sports arenas and spectator sports
Outdoor music shells and amphitheaters
Nature exhibits and zoos
Amusements, parks, resorts, and camps
Golf courses, riding stables, and water recreation
Yearly Day-Night Average Sound Level (Ldn) in Decibels1
Below 65
65-70 70-75 75-80 80-85 85+
Y
N2
N2
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
N2
N
N2
N
N2
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N2
25
25
Y
Y
Y
N2
30
30
25
Y3
Y3
N
N
N
30
Y4
Y4
N
N
N
N
Y5
Y5
N
N
N
N
Y5
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
25
Y3
30
Y4
N
Y5
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
25
Y3
25
30
Y4
30
N
Y5
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y6
Y6
Y
Y3
25
Y7
Y7
Y
Y4
30
Y8
N
Y
Y5
N
Y8
N
Y
N
N
Y8
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y9
N
Y
Y
Y
Y9
N
N
Y
25
N
N
N
N
30
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Notes: The designations contained in this table do not constitute a federal determination that any use of land covered by the program is
acceptable or unacceptable under federal, state, or local law. The responsibility for determining the acceptable and permissible
land uses and the relationship between specific properties and specific noise contours rests with the local authorities. FAA
determinations under Part 150 are not intended to substitute federally determined land uses for those determined to be appropriate
by local authorities in response to locally determined needs and values in achieving noise-compatible land uses.
1
Y = yes, land use and related structure compatible without restrictions;
N = no, land use and related structure not compatible and should be prohibited;
25,30, or 35 = land use and related structures generally compatible; measure to achieve Noise Level Reduction (NLR) of 25, 30, or 35 dB
must be incorporated into design and construction of structures;
2
Where the community determines that residential or school uses must be allowed, measures to achieve outdoor-to-indoor NLR of at least
25 dB and 30 dB should be incorporated into building codes and be considered in individual approvals. Normal residential construction
can be expected to provide and NLR of 20 dB; thus the reduction requirements are often stated as 5, 10, or 15 dB over standard
construction and normally assume mechanical ventilation and closed windows year-round. However, the use of NLR criteria will not
eliminate outdoor noise problems.
3
Measures to achieve NLR 25 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is
received, office areas, noise-sensitive areas, or where the normal level is low.
4
Measures to achieve NLR 30 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is
received, office areas, noise-sensitive areas, or where the normal level is low.
5
Measures to achieve NLR 35 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is
received, office areas, noise-sensitive areas, or where the normal level is low.
6
Residential buildings require an NLR of 25.
7
Residential buildings require an NLR of 30.
8
Residential buildings not permitted.
9
Land-use compatible provided special sound reinforcement systems are installed.
Source: Harris 1984.
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Appendix
A-9
T-6A Beddown EA
A.2
NOISE EFFECTS
A.2.1
Hearing Loss
Final
Noise-induced hearing loss is probably the best defined of the potential effects of human exposure to
excessive noise. Federal workplace standards for protection from hearing loss allow a time-average level
of 90 dB over an 8-hour work period, or 85 dB averaged over a 16-hour period. Even the most protective
criterion (no measurable hearing loss for the most sensitive portion of the population at the ear’s most
sensitive frequency, 4,000 Hz, after a 40-year exposure) suggests a time-average sound level of 70 dB
over a 24-hour period (EPA 1972). Since it is unlikely that airport neighbors will remain outside their
homes 24 hours per day for extended periods of time, there is little possibility of hearing loss below a
DNL of 75 dB, and this level is extremely conservative.
A.2.2
Nonauditory Health Effects
Nonauditory health effects of long-term noise exposure, where noise may act as a risk factor, have never
been found to occur at levels below those protective against noise-induced hearing loss, described above.
Most studies attempting to clarify such health effects have found that noise exposure levels established
for hearing protection will also protect against any potential nonauditory health effects, at least in
workplace conditions. The best scientific summary of these findings is contained in the lead paper at the
National Institutes of Health Conference on Noise and Hearing Loss which states the following:
“The nonauditory effects of chronic noise exposure, when noise is suspected to act as one
of the risk factors in the development of hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and other
nervous disorders, have never been proven to occur as chronic manifestations at levels
below these criteria (an average of 75 dBA for complete protection against hearing loss
for an eight-hour day). At the 1988 International Congress on Noise as a Public Health
Problem, most studies attempting to clarify such health effects did not find them at levels
below the criteria protective of noise-induced hearing loss, and even above these criteria,
results regarding such health effects were ambiguous. Consequently, one comes to the
conclusion that establishing and enforcing exposure levels protecting against noiseinduced hearing loss would not only solve the noise-induced hearing loss problem but
also any potential nonauditory health effects in the work place” (von Gierke 1990;
parenthetical italicized wording added for clarification).
Although these findings were directed specifically at noise effects in the work place, they are equally
applicable to aircraft noise effects in the community environment. Research studies regarding the
nonauditory health effects of aircraft noise are ambiguous, at best, and often contradictory. Yet, even
those studies which purport to find such health effects use time-average noise levels of 75 dB and higher
for their research.
For example, in an often-quoted paper, two University of California – Los Angeles (UCLA) researchers
apparently found a relation between aircraft noise levels under the approach path to Los Angeles
International Airport (LAX) and increased mortality rates among the exposed residents by using an
average noise exposure level greater than 75 dB for the “noise-exposed” population (Meacham and Shaw
1979). Nevertheless, three other UCLA professors analyzed those same data and found no relation
between noise exposure and mortality rates (Frericks et al. 1980).
A-10
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
As a second example, two other UCLA researchers used this same population near LAX to show a higher
rate of birth defects during the period of 1970 to 1972 when compared with a control group residing away
from the airport (Jones and Tauscher 1978). Based on this report, a separate group at the U.S. Centers for
Disease Control performed a more thorough study of populations near Atlanta'’ Hartsfield International
Airport for 1970 to 1972 and found no relation in their study of 17 identified categories of birth defects to
aircraft noise levels above 65 dB (Edmonds 1979).
A recent review of health effects, prepared by a Committee of the Health Council of The Netherlands
reviewed currently available published information on this topic (Committee of the Health Council of The
Netherlands 1996). They concluded that the threshold for possible long-term health effects was a 16-hour
(0600 to 2200) Leq of 70 dB. Projecting this to 24 hours and applying the 10 dB nighttime penalty used
with DNL, this corresponds to DNL of about 75 dB. The study also affirmed the risk threshold for
hearing loss, as discussed earlier. In summary, there is no scientific basis for a claim that potential health
effects exist for aircraft time-average sound levels below 75 dB.
A.2.3
Annoyance
The primary effect of aircraft noise on exposed communities is one of annoyance. Noise annoyance is
defined by the EPA as any negative subjective reaction on the part of an individual or group (EPA 1972).
As noted in the discussion of DNL (Ldn) above, community annoyance is best measured by that metric.
Because the EPA Levels Document (EPA 1972) identified DNL of 55 dB as “…requisite to protect public
health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety,” it is commonly assumed that 55 dB should be
adopted as a criterion for community noise analysis. From a noise exposure perspective, that would be an
ideal selection. However, financial and technical resources are generally not available to achieve that
goal. Most agencies have identified DNL of 65 dB as a criterion which protects those most impacted by
noise, and which can often be achieved on a practical basis (FICON 1992). This corresponds to about
13 percent of the exposed population being highly annoyed.
Although DNL of 65 dB is widely used as a benchmark for evaluting potential significant noise impact,
and is often an acceptable compromise, it is not a statutory limit and it is appropriate to consider other
thresholds in particular cases. In this EA, no specific threshold is used. The noise in each affected area is
evaluated on the basis of the information presented in this appendix and in the body of the EA.
A.2.4
Speech Interference
Speech interference associated with aircraft noise is a primary cause of annoyance to individuals. The
disruption of routine activities such as radio or television listening, telephone use, or family conversation
gives rise to frustration and irritation. The quality of speech communication is also important in
classrooms, offices, and industrial settings and can cause fatigue and vocal strain in those who attempt to
communicate over the noise. Research has shown that the use of the SEL metric will measure speech
interference successfully, and that an SEL exceeding 65 dB will begin to interfere with speech
communication.
A.2.5
Sleep Interference
Sleep interference is another source of annoyance associated with aircraft noise. This is especially true
because of the intermittent nature and content of aircraft noise, which is more disturbing than continuous
noise of equal energy and neutral meaning. Sleep interference may be measured in either of two ways.
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Appendix
A-11
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
“Arousal” represents actual awakening from sleep, while a change in “sleep stage” represents a shift from
one of four sleep stages to another stage of lighter sleep without actual awakening. In general, arousal
requires a somewhat higher noise level than does a change in sleep stage.
An analysis sponsored by the Air Force summarized 21 published studies concerning the effects of noise
on sleep (Pearsons et al. 1989). The analysis concluded that a lack of reliable studies in homes, combined
with large differences among the results from the various laboratory studies and the limited in-home
studies, did not permit development of an acceptably accurate assessment procedure. The noise events
used in the laboratory studies and in contrived in-home studies were presented at much higher rates of
occurrence than would normally be experienced in the home. None of the laboratory studies were of
sufficiently long duration to determine any effects of habituation, such as that which would occur under
normal community conditions.
Nevertheless, some guidance is available in judging sleep interference. The EPA identified an indoor
DNL of 45 dB as necessary to protect against sleep interference (EPA 1972). Assuming a very
conservative structural noise insulation of 20 dB for typical dwelling units, this corresponds to an outdoor
DNL of 65 dB as minimizing sleep interference.
Probability of Arousal or Behavioral
Awakening Per Noise Occurrence
(Percent)
Kryter (1984) reviewed the probability of arousal or behavioral awakening in terms of SEL. Figure A-4
(from Kryter [1984]: Figure 10.37) indicates that an indoor SEL of 65 dB or lower should awaken less
than 5 percent of those exposed. These results do not include any habituation over time by sleeping
subjects. Nevertheless, this provides a reasonable guideline for assessing sleep interference and
corresponds to similar guidance for speech interference, as noted above.
10
Laboratory Studies, Variety of Noises, Lukas
90
Steady State (In Home)
Transient (In Home)
80
}
Transformer, Transmission Line,
Window Air Conditioner, and
Distant Traffic Noise, Horonjeff, et al.
Truck Noise, Laboratory Study, Thiesen
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
59
69
79
89
99
10
11
12
Sound Exposure Level (dBA)
Figure A-4. Probability of Arousal or Behavioral Awakening in Terms of Sound Exposure Level
A-12
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
T-6A Beddown EA
A.2.6
Final
Noise Effects on Livestock and Terrestrial Wildlife
Animal responses to aircraft are influenced by many variables including aircraft size, proximity (both
height above the ground and lateral distance), engine noise, color, and flight profile. The type of aircraft
(e.g., fixed-wing versus rotary-winged [helicopters]) and its flight mission may also produce different
levels of disturbance and animal response (Smith et al. 1988).
Livestock
A large bibliography of studies on the effects of aircraft noise on large stock has consistently minimized
the effects of noise and vibration on the health and well-being of many animal species. Without
exception, these studies failed to provide conclusive evidence of any serious effect except trauma due to
panic reaction. In the literature review of Manci et al. (1988), behavior reactions observed in livestock
exposed to low-altitude subsonic overflights have generally consisted of startle reactions that were
considered minimal. Large livestock have been reported to respond to aircraft noise by sporadic jumping,
galloping, vocalization, and random movement. Reactions of beef cattle to low-altitude overflights were
comparable to the reactions to the presence of strange objects or persons.
Wildlife
The greatest impact to wildlife from aircraft overflights is from the visual effect of the approaching
aircraft and the concomitant subsonic noise. Studies have shown that wildlife react to visual stimuli (e.g.,
aircraft overflights) that are below 1,000 feet AGL (Lamp 1989, Bowles 1995). Aircraft overflights and
the associated noise can affect wildlife directly. Wildlife responses may include increased movement
after an overflight, avoiding or leaving areas where overflights occur, changes in foraging patterns, and
arousal of species-specific defensive behaviors (e.g., flight, aggression). Noise from aircraft overflights
may also have indirect affects on wildlife such as masking. Masking occurs when noise interferes with
the perception of a sound of interest. For example, masking may affect predator avoidance and the
detection of social signals (Bowles 1995).
The effects of noise from aircraft overflights are difficult to assess because a number of adaptive
responses may be involved, making the overt behavioral or physiological changes in response to noise
highly variable. These responses include the acoustic startle, the orienting response, and other speciestypical and individual strategies for coping with novelty, species-typical defensive behaviors, and
responses conditioned by previous exposures to noise.
Studies on the effects of noise on wildlife have been predominantly conducted on mammals and birds.
Studies on subsonic aircraft disturbances of ungulates (e.g., pronghorn, bighorn sheep, elk, and mule
deer), in both laboratory and field conditions, have shown that effects are transient and of short duration
and suggest that the animals habituate to the sounds (Workman et al. 1992; Krausman et al. 1993, 1998;
Weisenberger et al. 1996). Similarly, the impacts to raptors and other birds (e.g., waterfowl, grebes) from
aircraft low-level flights were found to be brief and insignificant and not detrimental to reproductive
success (Smith et al. 1988; Lamp 1989; Ellis et al. 1991; Grubb and Bowerman 1997).
The primary concern with aircraft overflights, and the associated noise, is the startle effect. For example,
this occurs when birds are surprised by sudden, unexpected loud noises and leave the nest or perch
suddenly. Possible negative impacts from this behavior include the expulsion of eggs or nestlings from
the nest as the parent leaves suddenly, increased predation of eggs or young when parents are off the nest,
and eggs or young may become chilled if the parent is off the nest for an extended period of time. Studies
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Appendix
A-13
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
of seven raptor species (including gyrfalcon and peregrine and prairie falcons) exposed to low-level
aircraft overflights found that raptor adults on nests tend to sit much more tightly than roosting adults and
those that did fly usually left for less than 5 minutes.
In experiments using 211 nests exposed to gunshots, blasting, and low-level aircraft overflights, no eggs
or young were ever rejected (Bowles 1995). However, adult peregrines have been known to step on eggs
or young and occasionally kick eggs out of the nest during rapid exits following gunshots and other
explosions (Smith et al. 1988). On the other hand, the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) found that eggs and
young are only rarely ejected from the nest after a startle. Panic responses are induced only after close
and abrupt approaches (e.g., an approach at 50 meters over a cliff face). Adults are very reluctant to leave
the nest, and generally remain away for a minute or less (USFS 1992).
In studies on the impacts of low-level jet overflights on nesting peregrine and prairie falcons, Ellis (1981)
and Ellis et al. (1991) found that responses to extremely frequent and nearby jet aircraft were often
minimal and never associated with reproductive failure. Typically, birds quickly resumed normal
activities within a few seconds following an overflight. While the falcons were noticeably alarmed by the
noise stimuli in this study, the negative responses were brief and not detrimental to reproductive success
during the course of the study.
Similarly, Lamp (1989) found in a study of the impacts to wildlife of aircraft overflights at Naval Air
Station Fallon in northern Nevada, that nesting raptors (golden eagle, bald eagle, prairie falcon,
Swainson's hawk, and goshawk) either showed no response to low-level flights (less than 3,000 feet
AGL) or only showed minor reactions. Minor reactions consisted of the bird assuming an alert posture or
turning its head and watching the aircraft pass overhead. Duration of raptor response to aircraft
disturbances was monitored for one year and was found to average 14 seconds for low-level overflights.
All raptor nests under observation successfully fledged young (Lamp 1989).
In a literature review of raptor responses to aircraft noise, Manci et al. (1988) found that most studies of
raptors did not show a negative response to overflights. When negative responses were observed they
were predominantly associated with rotary-winged aircraft or jet aircraft that were repeatedly passing
within one-half mile of a nest. A study on the potential impacts of a proposed airport on a large colony of
federally endangered Florida snail kites (Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus), suggested that impacts to the
habitat by land development associated with the airport could be more detrimental to the kites than the
impact of aircraft overflights (Manci et al. 1988).
In 1995, a 3 year study was initiated for the U.S. Air Force by the Alaska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife
Research Unit, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, and Alaska Biological Research to assess the effects of
jet overflights on the behavior, nesting success, and productivity of nesting peregrine falcons beneath five
MOAs in interior Alaska (Ritchie et al. 1998). To measure noise levels experienced by adult peregrines
and their young, animal noise monitors (ANM) were positioned on the nest cliff approximately 50 meters
from the nest in a position with similar exposure and elevation characteristics of the nest site. Control
nests, with no overflights, were also monitored for productivity and nest success.
An average of 34 nests per year were monitored over the 3 year study, with over 125,000 hours of
overflight and ambient noise data recorded by ANMs. Data from 1996 and 1997 indicate that the number
of overflights experienced by unsuccessful nests did not differ from successful nests and averaged 28 and
27 overflights each, respectively, through the nesting season. Daily sound exposure levels (SEL) were
slightly higher at successful nests (89.5 dBA) compared to unsuccessful nests (89.1 dBA). The daily
A-14
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
SEL, which is a time-averaged descriptor of the daily exposure of each nest to noise during the
monitoring period, ranged from 60 to 109.6 dBA for successful nests that had at least one overflight, and
from 60 to 110.6 dBA for unsuccessful nests. Overall, the average number of young per successful pair
was greater at the experimental sites than at the control sites (Ritchie et al. 1998).
Even if proven significant, most of the effects of noise are mild enough that they may never be detectable
as changes in population size or population growth against the background of normal variation (Bowles
1995). Many other environmental variables (e.g., predators, weather, changing prey base, ground based
human disturbance) may influence reproductive success and confound the ability to tease out the ultimate
factor in limiting productivity of a certain nest, area, or region (Smith et al. 1988). In contrast, the effects
of other human intrusions near nests, foraging areas, dens, etc. (e.g., hiking, bird watching, timber
harvesting, boating) are readily detected and substantial (USFS 1992).
A.2.7
Noise Effects on Structures
Normally, the most sensitive components of a structure to airborne noise are the windows and,
infrequently, the plastered walls and ceilings. An evaluation of the peak sound pressures impinging on
the structure is normally sufficient to determine the possibility of damage. In general, at sound levels
above 130 dB, there is the possibility of the excitation of structural component. While certain frequencies
(such as 30 Hz for window breakage) may be of more concern than other frequencies, conservatively,
only sounds lasting more than one second above a sound level of 130 dB are potentially damaging to
structural components (National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences 1977).
A recent study, directed specifically at low-altitude, high-speed aircraft on MTRs, showed that there is
little probability of structural damage from such operations (Sutherland 1990). One finding in that study
is that sound levels at damaging frequencies (e.g., 30 Hz for window breakage or 15 to 25 Hz for wholehouse response) are rarely above 130 dB.
Noise-induced structural vibration may also cause annoyance to dwelling occupants because of induced
secondary vibrations, or “rattle,” of objects within the dwelling — hanging pictures, dishes, plaques, and
bric-a-brac. Window panes may also vibrate noticeably when exposed to high levels of airborne noise,
causing homeowners to fear of breakage. In general, such noise-induced vibrations occur at sound levels
above those considered normally incompatible with residential land use. Thus, assessments of noise
exposure levels for compatible land use should also be protective of noise-induced secondary vibrations.
A.2.8
Noise Effects on Terrain
Members of the public often perceive that noise from low-flying aircraft can cause avalanches or
landslides by disturbing fragile soil or snow structures, especially in mountainous areas. There are no
known instances of such effects, and it is considered improbable that such effects will result from routine,
subsonic aircraft operations.
A.2.9
Noise Effects on Historical and Archaeological Sites
Because of the potential for increased fragility of structural components of historical buildings and other
historical sites, aircraft noise may affect such sites more severely than newer, modern structures. Again,
there are few scientific studies of such effects to provide guidance for their assessment.
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Appendix
A-15
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
One study involved the measurements of sound levels and structural vibration levels in a superbly
restored plantation house, originally built in 1795, and now situated approximately 1,500 feet from the
centerline at the departure end of Runway 19L at Washington Dulles International Airport. These
measurements were made in connection with the proposed scheduled operation of the supersonic
Concorde airplane at Dulles (Wesler 1977). There was special concern for the building's windows, since
roughly half of the 324 panes were original. No instances of structural damage were found. Interestingly,
despite the high levels of noise during the Concorde takeoffs, the induced structural vibration levels were
actually less than those induced by touring groups and vacuum cleaning within the building itself.
As noted above for the noise effects of noise-induced vibrations of normal structures, assessments of
noise exposure levels for normally compatible land uses should also be protective of historic and
archaeological sites.
A.3
REFERENCES
American National Standards Institute (ANSI). 1980. Sound Level Descriptors for Determination of
Compatible Land Use. Standard ANSI S3.23-1980.
ANSI. 1988. Quantities and Procedures for Description and Measurement of Environmental Sound, Part
1. Standard ANSI S12.9-1988.
Bowles, A.E. 1995. Responses of Wildlife to Noise. Pages 109-156 in R.L. Knight, and K.J. Gutzwiller,
eds. Wildlife and Recreationists: Coexistence Through Management and Research. Island Press,
Covelo, CA.
Committee of the Health Council of the Netherlands. 1996. Effects of Noise on Health. Noise/News
International 4. September.
Edmonds, L.D. 1979. Airport Noise and Teratogenesis. Archives of Environmental Health July/August.
Ellis, D.H. 1981. Responses of Raptorial Birds to Low Level Military Jets and Sonic Booms: Results of
the 1980-1981 Joint U.S. Air Force–U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Study. Prepared by the
Institute for Raptor Studies for USAF and USFWS. NTIS No. ADA108-778.
Ellis, D.H., C.H. Ellis, and D.P. Mindell. 1991. Raptor Responses to Low-level Jet Aircraft and Sonic
Booms. Environmental Pollution 74:53-83.
Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON). 1992. Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport
Noise Analysis Issues. August.
Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise (FICUN). 1980. Guidelines for Considering Noise in
Land-Use Planning and Control. June.
Fidell, S., D.S. Barger, and T.J. Schultz. 1991. Updating a Dosage-Effect Relationship for the
Prevalence of Annoyance Due to General Transportation Noise. Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America 89:221-233.
Fields, J.M., and C.A. Powell. 1985. A Community Survey of Helicopter Noise Annoyance Conducted
Under Controlled Noise Exposure Conditions. NASA TM-86400. March.
A-16
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Finegold, L.S., C.S. Harris, and H.E. von Gierke. 1994. Community Annoyance and Sleep Disturbance:
Updated Criteria for Assessing the Impacts of General Transportation Noise on People. Noise
Control Engineering Journal 42:January-February.
Frericks et al. 1980. Los Angeles Airport Noise and Mortality: Faulty Analysis and Public Policy.
American Journal of Public Health 357-362.
Grubb, T.G., and W.W. Bowerman. 1997. Variations in Breeding Bald Eagle Responses to Jets, Light
Planes and Helicopters. Journal of Raptor Research 31:213-222.
Harris, C.M. 1979. Handbook of Noise Control. McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Harris, C.M. 1984. Airport Noise Compatibility Planning; Development and Submission of Airport
Operator's Noise Exposure Map and Noise Compatibility Program; Final Rule and Request for
Comments. Federal Register 49:18 December.
Jones, F.N., and J. Tauscher. 1978. Residence Under an Airport Landing Pattern as a Factor in Teratism.
Archives of Environmental Health 10-12.
Krausman, P.R., M.C. Wallace, D.W. DeYoung, M.E. Weisenberger, and C.L. Hayes. 1993. The Effects
of Low-altitude Jet Aircraft on Desert Ungulates. International Congress: Noise as a Public
Health Problem 6:471-478.
Krausman, P.R., M.C. Wallace, C.L. Hayes, and D.W. DeYoung. 1998. Effects of Jet Aircraft on
Mountain Sheep. Journal of Wildlife Management 62:1246-1254.
Kryter, K.D. 1984. Physiological, Psychological, and Social Effects of Noise. NASA Reference
Publication 1115. July.
Lamp, R.E. 1989. Monitoring the Effects of Military Air Operations at Naval Air Station Fallon on the
Biota of Nevada. Nevada Department of Wildlife, Reno.
Manci, K.M., D.N. Gladwin, R. Villella, and M.G. Cavendish. 1988. Effects of Aircraft Noise and Sonic
Booms on Domestic Animals and Wildlife: A Literature Synthesis. NERC 88/29. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service National Ecology Research Center, Ft. Collins, Colorado.
Meacham, W.C., and N. Shaw. 1979. Effects of Jet Noise on Mortality Rates. British Journal of
Audiology 77-80.
Moulton, C. L. 1992. Air Force Procedure for Predicting Noise Around Airbases: Noise Exposure
Model (NOISEMAP). Technical Report AL-TR-1992-059.
National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences. 1977. Guidelines for Preparing
Environmental Impact Statements on Noise. Committee on Hearing, Bioacoustics, and
Biomechanics.
Pearsons, K.S., D.S. Barber, and B.G. Tabachick. 1989. Analyses of the Predictability of Noise-Induced
Sleep Disturbance. USAF Report HSD-TR-89-029. October.
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Appendix
A-17
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Ritchie, R.J., S.M. Murphy, and M.D. Smith. 1998. A Compilation of Final Annual Reports, 1995-1997.
Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) Surveys and Noise Monitoring in Yukon MOAs 1-5
and along the Tanana River, Alaska, 1995-1997. Prepared by ABR, Inc., Fairbanks, AK.
Schultz, T.J. 1978. Synthesis of Social Surveys on Noise Annoyance. Journal of the Acoustical Society
of America 64:377-405.
Smith, D. G., D. H. Ellis, and T. H. Johnson. 1988. Raptors and aircraft. Pages 360-367 in R.L. Glinski,
B.G. Pendleton, M.B. Moss, M.N. LeFranc, Jr., B.A. Millsap, and S.W. Hoffman, eds.
Proceedings of the Southwest Raptor Management Symposium and Workshop. National Wildlife
Federation, Washington, DC.
Smith, P.W., Jr. 1974. Averaged Sound Transmission in Range-Dependent Channels. Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America 55:1197-1204.
Sutherland, L. 1990. Assessment of Potential Structural Damage from Low Altitude Subsonic Aircraft.
Wyle Laboratories Research Report WR 89-16. El Segundo, CA.
Urick, R.J. 1972. Noise Signature of an Aircraft in Level Flight over a Hydrophone in the Sea. Journal
of the Acoustical Society of America 52:993-999.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1972. Report to the President and Congress on Noise.
Senate Report No. 92-63. Washington, DC. February.
EPA. 1974. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect the Public Health and
Welfare With an Adequate Margin of Safety. Report 550/9-74-004. March.
U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 1992. Report to Congress: Potential Impacts of Aircraft Overflights of
National Forest System Wildernesses. U.S. Government Printing Office 1992-0-685-234/61004.
Washington, D.C.
von Gierke, H.R. 1990. The Noise-Induced Hearing Loss Problem. NIH Consensus Development
Conference on Noise and Hearing Loss, Washington, DC., 22-24 January 1990.
Weir, D.S., S.J. Jumper, C.L. Burley, and R.A. Golub. 1995. Aircraft Noise Prediction Program
Theoretical Manual, Rotorcraft System Noise Prediction System (ROTONET). NASA TM83199 Part 4. April.
Weisenberger, M.E., P.R. Krausman, M.C. Wallace, D.W. DeYoung, and O.E. Maughan. 1996. Effects
of Simulated Jet Aircraft Noise on Heart Rate and Behavior of Desert Ungulates. Journal of
Wildlife Management 60:52-61.
Wesler, J. E. 1977. Concorde Operations At Dulles International Airport. NOISEXPO '77, Chicago, IL.
March.
Workman, G.W., T.D. Bunch, J.W. Call, R.C. Evans, L.S. Neilson, and E.M. Rawlings. 1992. Sonic
Boom/Animal Disturbance Studies on Pronghorn Antelope, Rocky Mountain Elk, and Bighorn
sheep. Utah State University Foundation, Logan. Prepared for U.S. Air Force, Hill AFB,
Contract F42650-87-C-0349.
A-18
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Analysis
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Young, R.W. 1973. Sound Pressure in Water from a Source in Air and Vice Versa. Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America 53:1708-1716.
Zorumski, W.E. 1982. Aircraft Noise Prediction Program Theoretical Manual. NASA TM-83199, Parts
1 and 2. February.
Zorumski, W.E., and D.S. Weir. 1986. Aircraft Noise Prediction Program Theoretical Manual, Propeller
Aerodynamics and Noise. NASA TM-83199 Part 3. June.
Appendix A: Aircraft Noise Appendix
A-19
A PPENDIX B
AIRSPACE
APPENDIX B: AIRSPACE
Table B-1. Current, Baseline, and Proposed Annual Airspace Use (sortie-operations)
(Page 1 of 2)
Airspace
Unit
Moody 1
MOA
Moody 2
MOA
(N/S)
Moody 3
MOA
Live Oak
MOA
VR-1065
Aircraft
Type1
A/OA-10
F-16 (M)
F-16 (O)
HC-130
F-18 (O)
F-15 (O)
T-38
KC-135 (O)
T-6A
Total
A/OA-10
F-16 (M)
HC-130
F-18 (O)
AV-8 (O)
HH-60
T-38
Total
A/OA-10
F-16 (M)
F-16 (O)
HC-130
F-18 (O)
F-15 (O)
T-38 (M)
T-38 (O)
F-14 (O)
T-6A
Total
A/OA-10
F-16 (M)
F-16 (O)
F-18 (O)
F-15 (O)
T-38
T-6A
Total
A/OA-10
F-16
HC-130
F-18 (O)
T-1 (O)
T-38
AV-8 (O)
T-6A
Total
Appendix B: Airspace
Current Conditions
(FY99/4)
Day
Night2
Total
913
2,251
119
8
361
121
0
17
0
3.790
501
1,172
456
125
17
262
0
2,533
488
286
509
29
85
125
0
8
8
0
1,538
137
286
22
6
106
0
0
557
4
5
4
10
2
0
9
0
34
27
45
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
75
31
24
57
0
0
40
0
152
4
29
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
40
6
29
0
0
19
0
0
54
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
940
2,296
122
8
361
121
0
17
0
3,865
532
1,196
513
125
17
302
0
2,685
492
315
509
36
85
125
0
8
8
0
1,578
143
315
22
6
125
0
0
611
4
5
4
10
2
0
9
0
34
Baseline/No-Action Alternative
(FY01/2)
Day
Night2
Total
0
0
119
8
361
121
5,205
17
0
5,831
0
0
456
125
17
262
0
860
0
0
509
29
85
125
1,749
8
8
0
2,513
0
0
22
6
106
8,183
0
8,317
0
0
4
10
2
52
9
0
77
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
57
0
0
40
0
97
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
19
0
0
19
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
122
8
361
121
5,205
17
0
5,834
0
0
513
125
17
302
0
957
0
0
509
36
85
125
1,749
8
8
0
2,520
0
0
22
6
125
8,183
0
8,336
0
0
4
10
2
52
9
0
77
Proposed Action
(FY01/4)
Day
Night2 Total
0
0
119
8
361
121
5,205
17
13,300
19,131
0
0
456
125
17
262
120
980
0
0
509
29
85
125
1,749
8
8
2,310
4,823
0
0
22
6
106
8,183
1,120
9,437
0
0
4
10
2
52
9
938
1,015
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
595
598
0
0
57
0
0
40
0
97
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
126
133
0
0
0
0
19
0
56
75
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
308
308
0
0
122
8
361
121
5,205
17
13,895
19,729
0
0
513
125
17
302
120
1,077
0
0
509
36
85
125
1,749
8
8
2,436
4,956
0
0
22
6
125
8,183
1,176
9,512
0
0
4
10
2
52
9
1,246
1,323
B-1
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table B-1. Current, Baseline, and Proposed Annual Airspace Use (sortie-operations)
(Page 2 of 2)
Airspace
Unit
Aircraft
Type1
Current Conditions
(FY99/4)
Day
Night2
Total
Baseline/No-Action Alternative
(FY01/2)
Day
Night2
Total
Proposed Action
(FY01/4)
Day
Night2 Total
A/OA-10
5
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
F-16 (M)
119
0
119
0
0
0
0
0
0
F-16 (O)
6
0
6
6
0
6
6
0
6
VR-1066
F-18 (O)
160
0
160
160
0
160
160
0
160
F-15 (O)
5
0
5
5
0
5
5
0
5
T-38
0
0
0
521
0
521
521
0
521
T-6A
0
0
0
0
0
0
938
308
1,246
Total
295
0
295
692
0
692
1,630
308
1,938
A/OA-10
1,175
75
1,250
0
0
0
0
0
0
LATN
HC-130
524
51
575
524
51
575
524
51
575
HH-60
1,070
70
1,140
1,070
70
1,140
1,070
70
1,140
T-6A
0
0
0
0
0
0
196
70
266
Total
2,769
196
2,965
1,594
121
1,715
1,790
191
1,981
Notes: 1(M) = Moody AFB aircraft; (O) = aircraft from other military installations; unless otherwise designated, all aircraft from
Moody AFB.
2
Night operations occur from 2200 (10:00 P.M.) to 0700 (7:00 A.M.).
Sources: Air Force 1999a, b.
B-2
Appendix B: Airspace
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table B-2. Aircraft Flight Profiles
Airspace Unit
(altitude range)1
Moody 1 MOA
(8,000 ft MSL –
17,999 ft MSL)
Moody 2
MOA (N/S)
(100 ft AGL –
7,999 ft MSL)
Moody 3 MOA
(8,000 ft MSL –
17,999 ft MSL)
Live Oak MOA
(8,000 ft MSL –
17,999 ft MSL)
VR-1065
(100 ft AGL –
1,500 ft AGL)
VR-1066
(100 ft AGL –
1,500 ft AGL)
LATN
(100 ft AGL –
1,500 ft AGL)
Aircraft
Type2
A/OA-10
HC-130
F-16 (M)
F-16 (O)
T-38
F-18
F-15
KC-135
T-6
A/OA-10
HC-130
HH-60
F-16
F-18
AV-8
T-38
A/OA-10
HC-130
F-16
T-38
F-15
F-18
F-14
T-6
A/OA-10
F-16
T-38
F-15
F-18
T-6
A/OA-10
HC-130
F-16
T-38
F-18
AV-8
T-1
T-6
A/OA-10
F-16
T-38
F-18
F-15
T-6
A/OA-10
HC-130
HH-60
T-6
Operation Data
Avg. Mins.
Avg. %
in Airspace
Power
40
90
45
50
40
85
30
85
30
90
35
90
35
96
70
75
40
80
40
90
60
45
90
60
40
85
25
85
20
87
40
90
40
90
20
50
40
85
25
90
35
90
35
90
30
90
40
80
25
90
35
85
30
90
25
85
35
90
40
80
40
80
45
85
30
85
85
90
25
88
30
85
45
85
80
80
40
80
30
85
85
90
30
88
30
85
80
80
45
75
70
50
100
60
80
80
Avg.
KIAS
275
200
480
480
300
480
480
310
180
275
150
115
480
480
450
420
275
200
480
400
475
460
470
180
275
480
300
450
350
180
230
210
460
300
380
420
220
210
220
460
300
390
400
210
225
210
100
210
Altitude Profile (% Sorties by altitude in feet)
100 – 500 500 – 1,000
1,000 –
10,000+
AGL
MSL
10,000 MSL
MSL
0
0
40
60
0
0
90
10
0
0
20
80
0
0
20
80
0
0
25
75
0
0
10
90
0
0
85
15
0
0
0
100
0
0
40
60
30
20
50
0
0
0
100
0
85
5
10
0
0
10
90
0
0
95
5
0
0
80
20
0
0
90
10
0
0
0
40
60
0
0
90
0
0
0
20
80
0
0
30
70
0
0
85
15
0
0
10
90
0
0
10
90
0
0
40
60
0
0
30
70
0
0
30
70
0
0
25
75
0
0
15
85
0
0
10
90
0
0
40
60
10
85
5
0
20
65
15
0
0
95
5
0
0
100
0
0
100
0
0
0
40
60
0
0
0
50
50
0
0
80
20
0
10
85
5
0
0
95
5
0
0
100
0
0
100
0
0
0
30
60
10
0
0
80
20
0
5
85
10
0
75
20
5
0
80
0
20
0
0
80
20
0
Note: 1MSL = above mean sea level; AGL = above ground level.
2
(M) = aircraft from Moody AFB; (O) = aircraft from other military installations.
Sources: Air Force 1998a, b.
Appendix B: Airspace
B-3
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Table B-3. Bird Avoidance Model (BAM) Hazard Categories for Affected Airspace*
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Live Oak MOA
Day
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
Night
M M M M M M L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L M M M
Moody 1 MOA
Day
S S
Night
S S
S
S
S
S
S
S
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M S
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M S
S
S
S
S
Moody 2 North MOA
Day
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
Night
L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
Moody 2 South MOA
Day
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
Night
M M M M M M L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L M M M
Moody 3 MOA
Day
S S S S S S
Night
M M M M M L
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M S
L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
S S S
M M M
VR-1065 and VR-1066
Day
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
Night
L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
Notes: *L = low;
M = moderate;
S = severe.
Source: Air Force 1999z.
B-4
Appendix B: Airspace
Appendix B: Airspace
60,000 MSL (FL600)
Class A
18,000 MSL
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
14,500 MSL
Class
G
Nontowered
Airport
Class E
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
10,000 MSL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Class
B
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 4,000 AGL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Varies
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Varies
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Class C
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 1,200 AGL
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Class G
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Class G
Class
G
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
LEGEND
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
2,500+ AGL
Class
D
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
700 AGL
Class G
AGL = feet above ground level
FL = flight level
MSL = feet above mean sea level
Not to scale
Airport
Source: National Imaging and Mapping Agency 1998.
B-5
FAA Airspace Classifications
Figure B-1
TN
NC
SC
Georgia
,,
,
,,,
MOODY 2
MOA
AL
MOODY 1
MOA
,,
★
MOODY
AFB
17,999' MSL
Atlantic
Ocean
FL
Gulf of
Mexico
Moody 1 MOA
8,000' – 17,999' MSL
8,000' MSL
7,999' MSL
85
A
Moody 2 North MOA
500' AGL – 7,999' MSL
L
A
B
A
M
A
Á
n
ha
ot
D
10
75
y
an
lb
A
Á
G
E
O
R
G
dy
A
oo
I
M
AF
B
a
st
do
al
V
f
SS
ul
G
A
R HA
LL
A
T
500' AGL
100' AGL
EE
of
16
F
ex
M
Á
L
o
ic
O
R
Moody 2 South MOA
100' AGL – 7,999' MSL
I
D
A
ity
t
C
10
A
ke
La
Á
95
l
a
n
t
Á
i
ll
vi
75
es
n
ai
c
G
e
O
c
e
a
n
95
LEGEND
Military Operations Area (MOA)
0
0
Feet
70 Horizontal Scale
Nautical Miles
VERTICAL EXAGGERATION = 121.52x
Moody 1 and Moody 2 North and South MOAs
B-6
3,500 Vertical Scale
Figure B-2
Appendix B: Airspace
1
100
Douglas Municipal
19
18
VR-100
Dothan
Valdosta
3
02
02/V
R-10
1
R
VR-1001/VR-1
IR-019
1
VR-100
-10
002
03
02
IR-
TALLAHASSEE
VR-1
0
-059
5
IR-
05
VR-1
VR-1
065
065
03
Á
MOODY 2 SOUTH
MOA
- 10
VR
IR-057/IR-059
Moody AFB
IR-057/IR
VR-106
VR-1004
VR-1041
19
3
MOODY 2 NORTH
MOA
IR-0
-10
02
Jacksonville
VR-1
-033
008
IR-032/IR
IR-016/IR-032/IR-033
IR-0
19
100
ARY
ND
VR
003
R-1
002/V
VR-1
VR
-1
3
Ocean
16
Á
41
Gainesville
5
VR-100
VR
-1
10
Á
Ocala
00
7
23
05
IR-0
09
IR-0
IR-
6
00
-1
3
00
VR
-1
VR
VR-10
Atlantic
7
-10
IR
-0
32
/IR
V
00
VR-1006
VR
-0
33
06
R-10
VR-1002/VR-1003/VR-1006
VR-
BOU
-1006
VR
3
100
VR-
5
IR-015
01
IR-016
IR-
LIVE OAK
MOA
N
LAT
Á
/VR
LAT
NB
OUN
DAR
Y
41
IR-0
66
MOODY 1 MOA
6
106
Á
01
VR-10
VR-
MOODY 3
MOA
8
IR-01
IR-0
6
Á
5
VR
01
IR-
Albany
Albany
VR-100
03
-10
4
VR-
ALAB AMA
Baxley Municipal
-09
VR
9
-1
0
Hazlehurst
G E O R G I A
IR-01
Á
Savannah
18
59
IR-0
R-0
7
VR
7/I
01
VR
-10
IR-
VR-1002/VR-1003
17
VR
-10
01
05
-10
IR-023
5
VR-09
21
-0
IR
IR-
VR
VR
-10
08
F L O R I D A
Crystal River
TN
NC
006
of
Georgia
VR-1
Gulf
SC
Á
7
Mexico
VR-
MOODY
AFB
Orlando
100
AL
★
VR-
100
VR
Lakeland
Florida
Tampa
6
-10
Á
06
Á
Gulf of
Mexico
Atlantic
Ocean
Á St. Petersburg
LEGEND
Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) Boundary
Statute Miles
0
Instrument Route (MTR)
35
Visual Route (MTR)
0
35
Nautical Miles
MTRs in the Region of Influence
Appendix B: Airspace
Figure B-3
B-7
V35
1
V97
V51
V 32
V1
57
9
V15
Á
V3
Savannah
62
43
V2
V5
G E O R G I A
8
V57
V579
V15
9
ALAB AMA
V57
2
7
V97
1
V5
V36
V26
MOODY 1 MOA
6
106
V52
43
V2
Dothan
VR-
V537
V578
9
/V15
V35
MOODY 3
MOA
Á
8
43
V2
1
MOODY 2 NORTH
MOA
Moody AFB
66
Á
VR
-10
Albany
Albany
V7
/V2
95
Valdosta
V198
Á
MOODY 2 SOUTH
MOA
VR-1065
V198
VR-106
V198
5
V579
TALLAHASSEE
V5
R
V598
1
V1
21
Á
V157
LAT
NB
OUN
DAR
Y
N
LAT
BOU
ARY
ND
Jacksonville
5/V
V3
9
15
LIVE OAK
MOA
V5
37
V7
/V
29
5
Atlantic
Á
V1
Ocean
Gainesville
59
/V2
95
V537
Á
V97
Ocala
F L O R I D A
Crystal River
V1
59
/V
TN
5
V53
7
1
V152
V75/2
Gulf
SC
AL
29
NC
of
Georgia
Á
Orlando
Mexico
MOODY
AFB
★
V35
V1
59
/V
Florida
Tampa
53
7
Lakeland
Á
Á
Gulf of
Mexico
Atlantic
Ocean
Á St. Petersburg
LEGEND
Low Altitude Tactical Navigation (LATN) Boundary
Statute Miles
0
Victor Route
35
0
35
Nautical Miles
Victor Routes in the Region of Influence
B-8
Figure B-4
Appendix B: Airspace
17,999' MSL
TN
NC
SC
AL
Georgia
,,
MOODY 3
MOA
★
Atlantic
Ocean
MOODY
AFB
FL
Moody 3 MOA
8,000' – 17,999' MSL
Gulf of
Mexico
8,000' MSL
85
A
L
A
B
A
M
A
Á
n
ha
ot
D
10
75
y
an
lb
A
Á
G
E
R
dy
oo
O
M
G
AF
I
B
A
R HA
LL
A
T
A
a
st
do
al
V
f
SS
ul
G
EE
of
16
F
ex
M
Á
L
o
ic
O
95
R
I
D
A
t
ity
C
10
A
ke
La
Á
l
a
n
t
i
e
ill
75
sv
ne
c
ai
G
Á
O
c
e
a
n
95
LEGEND
Military Operations Area (MOA)
0
0
Moody 3 MOA
Appendix B: Airspace
Feet
3,500 Vertical Scale
70 Horizontal Scale
Nautical Miles
VERTICAL EXAGGERATION = 121.52x
Figure B-5
B-9
TN
NC
SC
GA
AL
MOODY
AFB
Atlantic
Ocean
★
,
LIVE OAK MOA
Gulf of
Mexico
17,999' MSL
Florida
Live Oak MOA
8,000' – 17,999' MSL
8,000' MSL
85
A
L
A
B
A
M
A
Á
n
ha
ot
D
10
75
y
an
lb
A
Á
G
E
R
dy
oo
O
M
G
AF
I
B
A
R HA
LL
A
T
A
a
st
do
al
V
f
SS
ul
G
EE
of
16
F
ex
M
Á
L
o
ic
O
95
R
I
D
A
ity
t
C
10
A
ke
La
Á
l
a
n
t
i
c
n
ai
G
Á
ll
vi
es
e
75
O
c
e
a
n
95
LEGEND
Military Operations Area (MOA)
0
0
Live Oak MOA
B-10
Feet
3,500 Vertical Scale
70 Horizontal Scale
Nautical Miles
VERTICAL EXAGGERATION = 121.52x
Figure B-6
Appendix B: Airspace
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Specifications and Requirements for Use of VR-1065
Originating Activity. 347 OSS/OSTA, Moody AFB, GA 31699-5000.
Scheduling Activity. 347 OSS/OSTA, Moody AFB, GA 31699-1899.
Hours of Operation. 0700-0000 local daily.
Route Description.
Altitude Data
Cross at 1500MSL
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
1000 AGL
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
Pt
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
Fac/Rad/Dist
SZW 072/31
SZW 050/16
SZW 351/11
SZW 264/31
PFN 034/28
DWG 014/30
DWG 058/18
Lat/Long
30°42.0′N 83°48.0′W
30°43.0′N 84°08.0′W
30°44.0′N 84°24.0′W
30°31.0′N 84°58.0′W
30°36.0′N 85°23.0′W
30°58.0′N 86°23.0′W
30°38.0′N 86°23.0′W
Terrain Following Operations. Authorized entire route.
Route Width. 5 NM right and 6 NM left of centerline from A to B;
4 NM right and 5 NM left of centerline from B to C;
5 NM right and 2 NM left of centerline from C to D;
3 NM either side of centerline from D to F;
4 NM either side of centerline from F to G.
Special Operating Procedures:
(1) Tie-in FSS: Macon.
(2) Alternate exit D will be filed and utilized unless scheduled for 2914A.
(3) Report over to D to Tyndall APCH Ctl.
(4) Contact Eglin Mission Control on 262.3 prior to F for clearance into R-2914.
(5) CAUTION: IR-015 and IR-017 Parallel this route from Pt D to E. Call 187 TFG Danelly Field
742-9255 deconflict.
(6) Alternate entry: E
(7) Alternate Exit: D. Alternate Exit E authorized only with scheduled use of TYNDALL C MOA.
(8) Notify Tyndall RAPCON (DSN 523-2900) of impending use of VR-1065 at least one hour prior to
flight penetration of Tyndall C MOA, with an ETA for the east boundary of the Tyndall C MOA.
(9) Minimum altitude 1500FT. AGL between Points D and E. Noise sensitive area.
(10) CAUTION: IR-059 runs opposite direction to this route between Pts C and F. IR-057 parallels this
route between C and F. Call 1st SOW Hulbert Field, DSN 579-7811 to deconflict.
(11) CAUTION: VR-1001 and VR-1005 cross this route near Pt B.
(12) CAUTION: Numerous VRs and Irs converge near Point F.
(13) Route entry/exit times must be made plus/minus 5 minutes or route must be rescheduled.
(14) Do not overfly the town of Micosukee, FL, (30°36′N85°23′W) by 1500 feet or 3 NM. Extreme
noise sensitive area.
FSS’s Within 100 NM Radius: GNV, MCN
Appendix B: Airspace
B-11
T-6A Beddown EA
Final
Specifications and Requirements for Use of VR-1066
Originating Activity. 347 OSS/OSTA, Moody AFB, GA 31699-5000.
Scheduling Activity. 347 OSS/OSTA, Moody AFB, GA 31699-1899.
Hours of Operation. 0700-0000 local daily.
Route Description.
Altitude Data
Cross at 1500 MSL
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
01 AGL B 15 MSL to
1500 AGL
Pt
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Fac/Rad/Dist
VAD 090/15
VAD 004/25
AMG 302/29
AMG 344/33
AMG 063/22
AMG 107/38
AMG 148/38
VAD 121/17
Lat/Long
30°59.0′N 82°54.0′W
31°23.0′N 83°11.0′W
31°47.5′N 82°59.0′W
32°03.5′N 82°41.0′W
31°42.0′N 82°08.0′W
31°21.0′N 81°48.0′W
31°00.0′N 82°07.0′W
30°50.0′N 82°54.0′W
Terrain Following Operations. Authorized entire route.
Route Width. 5 NM either side of centerline A to B;
7 NM right and 6 NM left of centerline B to C;
5 NM either side of centerline C to D;
3 NM right and 9 NM left of centerline D to E;
9 NM right and 2 NM left of centerline E to F;
3 NM right and 8 NM left of centerline F to G;
3 NM right and 10 NM left of centerline G to H.
Special Operating Procedures:
(1) Tie-in FSS: Macon (MCN).
(2) Alternate Exit: E.
(3) Alternate Entry: F.
(4) Point G to Highway 441, maintain altitude of 1500 feet AGL.
(5) Pt A and H are within Moody MOA 2 airspace. Contact Valdosta Apcph Con on Freq 285.6 for
deconfliction prior to MOA entry.
(6) Extreme noise sensitive areas – avoid by 1500 feet or 3 NM DuPont, GA (Pt A) 30°59′00″N
82°53′00″W; Power Plant between Pt D-E 31°56.3′N 82°20.6′W Alapacha, GA 31°23′00″N
83°13.5′W.
(7) VR-1002/1003 Parallel this route from Pt A to B.
(8) CAUTION: IR-016 runs opposite direction between Pt A and B.
(9) CAUTION: Pt B, VR-1003 crosses this route from SW to NE and VR1002/VR-1004 Parallels this
route from B to C.
(10) CAUTION: VR-1001 and VR-1002 cross this route at Pt C.
(11) CAUTION: VR-1004 crosses this route between C and D.
(12) CAUTION: VR-1002/1003 and VR-1004 cross this route 10 NM prior to Pt E, with VR-1003
crossing again at Pt. E.
(13) IR-023 crosses this route from North to South just past Point E, and from NE to SW at Point G.
(14) Route entry/exit times must be made plus/minus 5 minutes or route must be rescheduled.
FSS’s Within 100 NM Radius: AND, GNV, MCN
B-12
Appendix B: Airspace
,,,
,,,
,,,
Cook Co.
ADEL
V 579
,,
,,
,,
LAKELAND
RESTRICTED
Brint
AREA
Moody
Air Force Base
Paso Fino
CLASS D
AIRSPACE
R-3008
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
CLASS E
AIRSPACE
VALDOSTA
Comanche
Valdosta
Regional
Airport
CLASS D
AIRSPACE
CLASS E
AIRSPACE
,,
,,
Georgia
VALDOSTA
REGIONAL
AIRPORT
MOODY
AFB
★
★
Atlantic
Ocean
Florida
A&H
Bird
V 579
Bass Limited
,,
,,
JENNINGS
LEGEND
Victor Route (General Aviation)
Gulf of
Mexico
Public Airport
Statute Miles
0
Class D Airspace
4
Class E (sfc) Airspace
Class E Airspace with Floor 700 Feet above Surface
Private Airport
Airspace and Aviation Support Facilities in the Vicinity of
Valdosta Regional Airport and Moody Air Force Base, Georgia
Appendix B: Airspace
0
4
Nautical Miles
Figure B-7
B-13
,,
,,
,,
Clardy
DAWSON
V3
5
Georgia
GEORGIA
★ SOUTHWEST
REGIONAL AIRPORT
,,,
,,,
,,,
Dawson
MOODY AFB
★
Atlantic
Ocean
LEESBURG
Florida
Gulf of
Mexico
Pecan VORTAC
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
Tallahassee
V 57
8
ALBANY
Southwest Georgia
Regional Airport
Double O
V 97
CLASS D
AIRSPACE
,,,,
,,,,
,,,, Putny
,,,,
CLASS E
AIRSPACE
Pinebloom
-159
V 35
LEGEND
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
Victor Route (General Aviation)
VORTAC
Class D Airspace
Private Airport
Class E (sfc) Airspace
Public Airport
Class E Airspace with Floor 700 Feet above Surface
Non-Directional Radiobeacon
Airspace and Aviation Support Facilities in the Vicinity of
Southwest Georgia Regional Airport, Albany, Georgia
B-14
Statute Miles
0
3
0
3
Nautical Miles
Figure B-8
Appendix B: Airspace
,,,
,,,
HAVANA
V 198
Georgia
MOODY AFB
★
★ TALLAHASSEE
REGIONAL AIRPORT
Quincy
Atlantic
Ocean
Florida
Tallahassee
Gulf of
Mexico
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,
TALLAHASSEE
V7
-2
Tallahassee
Regional Airport
95
CLASS C
AIRSPACE
,,,,
,,,,
,,,, Wakul
,,,,
,,,,
CLASS C AND E
AIRSPACE
7
V9
LEGEND
Victor Route (General Aviation)
Public Airport
Statute Miles
0
Class C Airspace
3
Class E (sfc) Airspace
,,,
,,,
,,,
Class E Airspace with Floor 700 Feet above Surface
Non-Directional Radiobeacon
Airspace and Aviation Support Facilities in the Vicinity of
Tallahassee Regional Airport, Florida
Appendix B: Airspace
0
3
Nautical Miles
Figure B-9
B-15
Georgia
MOODY AFB
★
Atlantic
Ocean
★
LAKE CITY
MUNICIPAL
AIRPORT
,,
,,
Florida
WHITE SPRINGS
V 157
Gulf of
Mexico
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
Wellborn
LAKE CITY
,,,,, Lake City
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
,,,,,
Lake City
Municipal Airport
Cannon Creek
CLASS E
AIRSPACE
Lake City
LAKE BUTLER
,
LEGEND
Victor Route (General Aviation)
,,,
,,,
,,,
Class E Airspace with Floor 700 Feet above Surface
3
Non-Directional Radiobeacon
0
Private Airport
3
Nautical Miles
Public Airport
Airspace and Aviation Support Facilities in the Vicinity of
Lake City Municipal Airport, Florida
B-16
Statute Miles
0
Figure B-10
Appendix B: Airspace
Georgia
V 441
MOODY AFB
★
Atlantic
Ocean
★
GAINESVILLE
REGIONAL
AIRPORT
,,
,,
,,
Florida
ALACHUA
V 157
Gulf of
Mexico
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,
Flying
Horseman
Wynds
Gainesville
Regional Airport
GAINSEVILLE
GAINESVILLE
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
,,,,
CLASS D
AIRSPACE
,,
CLASS E
AIRSPACE
Peach
Orchard
HAWTHORNE
Gainesville
VORTAC
LH
,,
,,
MICANOPY
LEGEND
,,,
,,,
,,,
Victor Route (General Aviation)
VORTAC
Class D Airspace
Private Airport
Class E (sfc) Airspace
Public Airport
Class E Airspace with Floor 700 Feet above Surface
Non-Directional Radiobeacon
Airspace and Aviation Support Facilities in the Vicinity of
Gainesville Regional Airport, Florida
Appendix B: Airspace
Statute Miles
0
3
0
3
Nautical Miles
Figure B-11
B-17
A PPENDIX C
AGENCY
CORRESPONDENCE
APPENDIX C: AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
Federal Agencies
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Greg Masson
4270 Norwich St.
Brunswick, GA 31520
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Stan Simpkins
1612 June Ave.
Panama City, FL 32405
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Larry Goldman
1208 B Main St.
Daphne, AL 36526
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Region 4
1875 Century Blvd.
Atlanta, GA 30345
State Agencies
Cherie Trainor
Coordinator, Florida State Clearinghouse
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
Omegia Burgess
State Single Point of Contact
Budget and Control Board
Office of State Budget
1122 Ladies Street - 12th Floor
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Debra Stephens
Georgia State Clearinghouse
Room 8069
270 Washington St. SW, 8th Floor
Atlanta, GA 30334
Alabama Department of Environmental Management
Scott Demick
PO Box 301463
Montgomery, AL 36130-1463
Appendix C
C-1
United States Department of the Interior
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE
SERVICE
247 South Milledge Avenue
Athens, Georgia 30605
West Georgia Sub Office
P-0. Box 52560
Ft. Beaning, Georgia 3 1995-2560
Coastal Sub Office
4270 Norwich Street
Brunswick, Georgia 3 I520
December2 1, 1999
Lt. Col. Guy W. Wells
Departmentof the Air Force
347 CESKD
3485 GeorgiaStreet
Moody Air ForceBase,Georgia 3 1699-1707
Tim Rottomky
Atttt: Mr.
RC
Flus Log # cto-0574
Dear Sir:
Thank you for your November 24,1999 letter and biological review concerning two new
proposedtraining activities in the vicinity of Bemiss Field on Moody Air ForceBase (AFB),
Georgia. The purposeof thesenew training activities are to field train security forces personnel
andto useBemissField for parasaiiingoperations. A kderal threatenedspecies,the eastern
indigo snake(Drymamzhon curuis couperi), and a state listed species,the gophertortoise
(GopheruPpoZyphemw) are the only listed species that may be affected by the proposedaction.
Our office issueda non-jeopardybiologicalopinion on December 17,1996 for proposed
constructionof a drop zone at BemissField and its possr’ble effects on the eastern indigo snake.
However, this proposed drop zonebasnot beenbuilt. Our o@ce alsoissueda modification to
the biological opinionon May 2, 1997,for the proposed use of BemissField’asa helicopter
landingzone. We havereviewedthe information you provided andsubmit the following
commentsunderprovisionsof the EndangeredSpeciesAct of 1973(Act) asamended( 16 U.S.C.
I53 1 et seq.).
Accordingto the infwmration you provided,the proposedtraining activities will involve the use
of all-terrain vehicles(ATVs) andfoot traffic. However, ATV use will be limited and will be
restricted from environmentallysensitiveareas. Also accordingto your biological review,
troopswill be trained on the needto avoid gophertortoises and their burrows andindigo snakes
(which is consisteritwith Reasonableand Pnxknt Measure #4 of the May 2,1997 amended
Biological Opinion). No surfacedisturbancewill occur in the environmentallysensitive areas.
Therefore,we agreewith your determinationthat this proposedproject is not likely to adversely
affect Federallyendangeredor threatenedspecies. We believe that the requirementsof Section
7 of the EndangeredSpeciesAct havebeensatisfied and no firther consultationis required.
However, obligationsunder Section7 of the Act must be reconsideredif (1) new information
revealsimpactsof this identified action that may affect fisted speciesor critical habitat in a
manner not previously considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner which
was not considered in this assessment; or (3)‘a new species is listed or critical habitat
determined that may be affected by the identified action.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment during the planning stages of your project. If you
have any questions, please write or call staff biologist Robert Brooks of our Brunswick office at
(912) 2659336.
Sincerely,
United States Department of the Interior
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
247 South Milledge
Avenue
Athens, Georgia 30605
Coastal Sub OffIce
4270 Norwich Street
Brunswick, Georgia 3 1520
West Georgia Sub Office
P.O. Box 52560
Ft. BeMing, Georgia 31995-2560
January20,200o
Linda Devine
HQ ACC/CEV 1’
129Andrews Slreet, Suite 102
LangleyAFB, Virginia 23665-2769
Re:
FWS Log #00-0597
Dear Ms. Devinc:
The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service(Service)hasreceivedyour letter datedDecember17,1999
soliciting commentsregardiugthe Draft EnvironmentalAssessment(EA) Joint Primary Aircraft
Training System(JPATS)/T-6ABeddownat Moody Air ForceBase,Georgia. All of Moody
AFB, Moody 2 North and SouthMilitary Operations‘Area.(MOA),Visual Route (VR)-1066, and
portionsof Moody 1 MOA are within the coverageareaof.@ Brunswick Field Office.
Therefore,commentsareprovidedfor theseareasin accordan!ewith provisionsof the Fish and
Wildlife CoordinationAct (48 Stat. 401, asamended;16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.) andSection 7 ofthe
EndangeredSpeciesAct (Act) of 1973.
As a result of recentwood stork surveys,onenew wood stork colony (
rookery) has
beenlocatedwithin Moody 1 MOA. The-rookery
is locatedin Brooks County,
Georgiaat the lollowing coordinateswand
-).
We requestthe inclusion of this
new information in the EA. In addition,onewood stork nestingcolony (Raybon)in Brantley
County, Georgi:l occurswithin thevicinity of VR-I 066. The Servicerecommendsthat a 1-mile
buffer zonebe pl&d &ou&l &is site duringthe’nes&g<e-&on.
We appreciatelhe opportunitylo commenton this project. If you havefurther questionsor
requireadditionalinformation, pleasecontactJeff Gardnerat (912) 265-9336.
Sincerely,
:
(_
:
-*
,:.
:.,
:
,;.
(I.
:
‘Field Supervisor
.
:
~-.
.
_--
-_-
-,“-
I
,
“----“...-..-.---.-~.”
I__
-.--_.
_
.-
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
P. 0: Drawer 1190
Daphne, Alabama 36526
INREPLYREFERTO
OO-0540a
February 3, 2000
Ms. Linda DeVine, Project Manager
HQ ACC/ CEVP
129 Andrews Street, Suite 102
Langley AFB Va. 23665-2769
Dear Ms. DeVine:
This letter is in response to a letter from your office, dated December 17, 1999, requesting
comments on the Beddown of T-6A aircraft at Moody Air Force Base at Valdosta, Georgia. We
have reviewed the information you enclosed and are providing the following comments in
accordance the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 153 1 et
seq.).
A.
Endangered Snecies Act
Although our records show there are endangered, threatened, or proposed species, and their
critical habitat in the project area ( Moody 3 MOA ) we, after careful consideration of the
minimum operational altitude as specified, feel no impacts would result. Therefore, no further
endangered species consultation will be required for this portion of the project unless: 1) the
identified action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect on listed species or
designated Critical Habitat; 2) new information reveals the identified action may affect Federally
protected species or designated Critical Habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously
considered; or 3) a new species is listed or Critical Habitat is designated under the Endangered
Species Act that may be affected by the identified action.
If you need any additional information, please contact Mr. Bert W. Steen, at 334-44 l-5 18 1 x 38
and kindly refer to the reference number above.
Larry E. Goldman
Field Supervisor
PHONE: 334-44 l-5 18 I
www.fws.eov
SHIPPING ADDRESS: 1208-B Main Street, Daphne, AL 36526
FAX: 334-44 l-6222
United States Department of the Interior
,‘, ”
,.
_’
.
yblGk8orgiasu~O~~
U.S. FtSH AND W&DLIFB SERVICE
247 Soutl~Mi~kd~ea’bcnw
&hems, &AW& 30604
_,.
-’ I
P.o:‘ao* fis60
’
Ft. Ben&g, Gem& 3 1995-2560
’
,.
”
.,
.,
..
‘,
LindaDevine
HQ ACCKWP
129Andrews Street, Suite 102
LangleyAFB, Virginia 23665-2769
Re: Fws Log #oo-0662
Dear Ms. Devine:
TheU.S. Fish andWildlife Service(Service)hasreviewedthe preliminay F&HZEnvironm&tal
Assessmentregardingthe Joint Primary Aircr& TrainingSystem(3PATS)/T4A Seddoti at
Moody AFB, Georgiaandattachedletter from Rick SpauldingdatedFebtuary9,2ooO. We
submitthe following commentsunderprovisionsof the EndangeredSpeciesAct of 1973(A@ as
amended(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Proposedactivitieswill resultin increasedsortie operationswithin Military OperationsArea
@#IA) 1,2 N/S, 3;Live Oak, Vial Route (VRj-IO65 and 1066,andLow +ltit.ude Tactical
Navigation(LATN) boundaries.All sortieswithin Moody $3, andLive Oak MOA’s will be
conductedat attitudesgreaterthan 8,000feet abovemeansealevel(MSL). Sortiesoccurring
within Moody 2 N MOA would rangein altitudefrom 500fti aboveground IeveI(AGL) up to
but not including8,000tiet MSL. Moody 2 S MOA encompasses
theairspacefrom 100f&t
AGL up to but not including.8,OOO
feet MSL. IX-1065 and 1066containaircr& traffic that
extendTom a floor of 100feet AGL to a ceilingof 1,500feet AGL. Flights,withinthe LATN
areawould rangebetween100-300feet AGL, accordingto the aircraft used,up to 1,500feet
AGL.
We suggestthat Moody AFl3 consultyearlywith the Sm
to detetine if new wood stork
rookeriesor bald eaglenestsarelocatedwithin any of the proposedf&&t areas. In addition, if
areaswithin the LATH that are outsideof designatedMOA’s andVR’s are Usedfor training
flights, the Servicewill providea listingof additionalwood stork rookeriesandbaldeqIe nests
occurringunder-these areas.Thesesitesfhouid alsobe protectedby a l-mile buffer, According
to the EnvironmentalAssessment,
baldeaglenestslocatedwithin m-1065 witt be avoidedby
l-mile laterallyand 1,500feet AGL fi=omSeptemberIS throughJune 1. Additionally,the wood
stork colony locatedadjacentto VR- 1066will be avoidedby 1-mile laterally. All other sortie
operationswill occur at 8,000feet andaboveMSL in areaswith wood stork coloniesandbald
eaglenests;therefore,no impactsare anticipatedin theseMOA’s. Due to theseavoidance
measures,the Serviceconcursthat the proposedsortieoperationsare not likely to adversely
affect either the baldeagleor wood stork.
.
We appreciateyour conthued.co!nmh& to the consewationof &idung&cd speciesaadother
n fish andwildlife resources.If you haveanyquestionsor requireadditionalasshtaace,peak
contactJeff Gardnerof my Mat (912) 265-9336ext. 21.
Sincerely,
SandraS. Tucker
Field Supuvisw
CC:
FWS-Bru~wick
,w
GEORGIA STATfi CLl9WNGHOU3E
ExEcmomER
TO:
NaLindaADeib
AirConabatBnrslch,HQAcc/cEvp
129Andma St., ste. 102
Laqley AFB, VA 23665-9434
.I
:.
1
1
FROMI DebtaS. SW
Adah&@Geolgiastate qeatin*e
DATE: 9/8!99
APPIKANTi eeperrmantofthe Airface
PRCUEiCTzBeddam of T-6A Aim&, Moody AFB
CFDA#:
STATEID: W990908007
656-3855.
;il
‘.
I
II
OFFICE
ANIl BUDGET
OEORGIA STATB CIZARlNt3HOUSEb&MORAND~
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372RRVUiW PROCESS
ROY E. BARNES
GovRwmR
To:
OF PLANNING
M. mmm!soN
DXRECIVR
Ms. LindaA, Dcvine
A& ChunbatRmnch,HQ ACC/CEVP
129Andrcw3 St, ste. 102
LangleyMB, VA 2366599434
FROM: Debra S. Stephurs,-m
Georgia statec1oaringhousc
DATE: 10/19/99
SUBJECT: ExecutiveOrder 12372Review
PROJECT: BedciownofT-6A Aimaft, Moody AFB
STATE ID: OA990908007
Additionai Comments:
DSWaw
ENCLI south GeorgiaRDC, w/ awl., sepbenabpa
29,N99
DNR Historic PreservationDivision, Cktober IS,1999
Form SC4EIS-4
Janmy 1995
GEORGIASTATE CLEARINGHOUSE MEMO-UM
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372REVIEW PROCESS
TO:
Linda ADevine
Air CombatBranch,HQ ACCYCEVP ;
129Andrews St #102
LangleyAFB, VA 23665-9434
FROM:, GeorgiaStateClearinghouse
DATE: KY22f99
SUBJECT: ExecutiveOrder 12372Review
APPLICANT? US Air Force
PROJECT: EA/ FONSI: Joint Ahraft Tmining sys,Moody AFB
CFDA#:
STATE ID: GA991222010
FEDERAL ID:
Correspondence
relatedto the aboveproject wasrecehed by the GeorgiaStateClearinghouseon
12f22f99. Th;ereviewhasbaen~~andeveryeffoitisbeiag~to~I#omptaction
Theproposalwill be reviewedfbr its consistencywith goah, pokies, plans, objectives*
ptograms,- vironmental~~~~far~Io~~ofRegianalImpact(DRI)or
inconsistenciesv&h federalexecutiveorders,actsand/orrules andrcguhtions, andif applicable,
with budgetaryrest&n@. The initial review prods shouldbemete
by l/13/00.
IftheCIearinghousehasnot~youbythatdate;~~proposalmaybe~~
consistent,Inthat ever&forward this receiptto the tiding agencyto show compliancewith
ExecutiveorderIU72ormakeitpartofthefederalrccordforthis~jact.
In fiatwe cor&ponden= regardingthis project,pleaseincludethe StateApplicatiou Identifier
numbershownabove. If you haveany questionsm
this projact, pleasecontactus at (404)
656-3855.
.:
” : ., ‘;
..:,....li,.?..,
; i 4.
:
Form SC-I.
January1995
..-
bftioe C. Bprrett Commissioner
Georgia Departtient pf Natural Resources
Historic Preservation Division
W. Ray Lute, Division Dired$or and Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
500 The Healey 8ullding, 57 Fofsyth Street, N. W.. Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Telephone (404) 656-2840
Fax (404) 857-1040
October 15, 1999
Linda A. DeVine,
Air Combat CommandEnvironmentalAnalysisBranch
HQ ACCYCEVP
129Andrews Street,Suite 102
LangleyAPB, Virginia23665-9434
RE:
Beddownof T-6A Aircraft, Moody APB
Lcwndes County, Georgia
GA990908-007
Dear Ms. DeVine:
<
The Historic PreservationDivision hasreviewedthe information submittedconc&g the
proposedbeddown.of T-6A aircraf)at Moody Air ForceB&e, LowndesCounty, Georgia. Based
on the informattjqn~~,&led, it appears
that no archaeological
r&ourceslistedin or eligiblefor listing
in the National kegister 6f Historic Placesare Locatedwithin the project’sareaof potentialeffects.
However, we look forward to reviewingthe EnvironmentalAssessmentwhenit is prepared.
It is importantto rememberthat anyfuture chaugesto-this project asit is ctirrent~yproposed
may require additionalstepsfor Section106cdmplianct. HPD encourage federal agenciesand
projectapplicantsto discusssuchchangeswith our office to erisurethat potentialeffectsto historic
resourcesare adequatelyconsideredin projectplanning.
.
Pleaserefm to projectnumberGA990908’-007
in a& ,futurecorrespondence.Ifwemay be
of further assistance,pleasecontact SerenaBellew, Enuironhental
Rev& AssociatePlanner,at
(404) W-6624;
Sincerely,
Rkhard Cloues..
Deputy StateHistoric PreservationOfficer
,
RC:kec
’
JamesFJ&t$ SouthGeorgiaRDC
cc:
Debra Stephens,GA StateClearinghotie
‘.
Georgia Department
I
Lonice
C. Barrett,
of Natural
Historic
Commissioner
Resources
Preservation
Division
W. Ray Lute, Division Director
end Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
600 The Healey Building,
57 Forsytll Street, N. W., Atlanta,
Georgia
30303
Fax (404) 657-1040
http://www.gashpo.org
: Telephone
(404) 656-2840
TO:
Alton Chavis
Department of the Air Force
FROM:
David R. Bennett
EnvironmentalReGew Coordinator
Historic PreservationDivision
RE:
EA/FONSI: Moody AFB., BeddownT-GA, Transition Training
Lowndes‘Cbunty, G’eorgizY
HP991220-006
DATE:
January 11,200O
-x
-I
rr
The Historic Preservation,lXvision(HPD) hasreviewedthe informatiorl received
concerningthe above-referencedproject. Our commentsare offered to assistfederal agencies
and project applicantsin complying with the provisions of Section 106of the National Historic
PreservationAct.
Basedon the information !ubmitted, HPD concurswith the recommendationthat no
historic propertieswhich are Wed in or eligible for listing in the National Registerof Historic
Placeswill be affected by this undertaking.Pleasekeepin mind, however, that any changesto
this project as proposedwill reqTe further review by our office for compliancewith the
Section 106 process.
If we may be of further assistance,pleasecontactMs. SerenaBellew, Environmental
Review AssociatePlanner,at (40&j 651-6624.Pleaserefer to the project number assigned
abovein any future correspondep.
-. -..
DRB:kcs
cc:
-.
JamesHorton, SouthGeorgiaRDC
.
TOO@
.-
:.:.
XVd
6O:LI
OO/TO/ZO
.Georgia
Lonice C. Barrett,
Department
of Natural
Historic
Commissioner
Resources-
Preservation
Division-
W. Ray Lute. Division Director and Deputy Stat13 Historic Preservation
Office
500 The Healey Building,
57 Fbrsyth Street, N W., Atlanta,
Georgia
3030:
Telephone
(4041 656-2840
Fax (404) 657-l 1140 http:l/www.gashpo.org
TO:
GeorgiaStateClearing House
FROM:
David R. Bennett,
EnvironmentalRevue
v
Coordinator
Historic PreservationDivision
RE:
EA/FONSI: Joi$Aircraft Taining System, Moody AFB
Lowndes
-.. County,,Lgqlg$,
.___
GA991220-010
DATE:
January14, 2000
The Historic PreservationDivision (HPD) hasreviewed the information received
concerningthe above-referencedproject. Our commentsare offered to assist federalagencies
and project applicantsin complyingwith the provisionsof Section106 of the National Historic
PreservationAct.
Basedon the information submitted, HPD concurswith the recommendationthat no
historic propertieswhich are listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Placeswill be affected by this undertaking.Pleasekeep in mind, however, that any changesto
this project as prqposedwill require further review by our office for compliancewith the
Section 106 process.
If we may be of further assistance,pleasecontact Ms. SerenaBeliew. Environmental
Review AssociatePlanner,at (404) 65l-6624. Pleaserefer to the project numberassigned
above in any future correspondence.
_..-.
...._ ,. ----
DRB: kcs
CC:
JamesHorten, South GeorgiaRDC
I-
..
:
.-
’
k.
xvd
ZOOpJ
--
-..--
_-.-
OTZLT
OO/TO/Z~
-
STATE
DEPARTMENT
“Drdicated
OF
to making
OF
FLORIDA
CO,MMUNITY
Florida
a better
place
AFFAIRS
to call
home”
STEVEN M.
JEB BUSH
SEIBERT
Secretary
Governor
December 14, 1999
Ms. Linda A. DeVine
Department of the Air Force
Headquarters
Air Combat Command
Environmental
Analysis
Branch
HQ ACC/CEVP
129 Andrews Street,
Suite 102
Langley Air Force Base, Virginia
RE:
23665-9434
U.S. Department of the Air Force - Preparation
of
Environmental
Assessment to Evaluate .Potential
Ellvironmental
Impacts Resulting,from
the Beddown of the
T-6A Aircraft
- Moody Air Force Base, Georgia - Of
Interest
to the State of Florida
SAI:
FL9909080744C
Dear Ms. DeVine:
The Florida
State Clearinghouse,
pursuant
to Presidential
Executive
Order 12372, Gubernatorial
Executive
Order 95-359, the
Coastal ZoneManagement Act, 16 U.S.C. SS 1451-1464, as amended,
and the Natjonal.Environmental
Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. S§ 4321,
4331-4335, 4341-4347, as amended, has coordinated
a review of the
above-referenced
project.
The Department of Transportation
(DOT) offers
comments
indicating
that the environmental
assessment should specifically
address the socioeconomic
impact that transition
training
may
have on each of the three civil
facilities
and the surrounding
areas.
Changes to approved Noise Impact contour
maps of airport
Master Plans or Part 150 Noise Programs resulting
from T-6A
flight
operations
must be considered.
The impact of increased
flight
traffic
on existing
facility
capabilities
and planned
capacity
improvement projects
at each facility
should also be
examined.
Airport
Master Plans should reflect
any airport
capacity
issues necessary to support increased
operations
2555
SHUMARD
OAK
BOULEVARD
l
TALLAHASSEE,
FLORIDA
Phone:
H50.488.0466lSuncom
278.0466
FAX:
850.921.0781/Suncom
Internet
address:
http://www.dca.state.fl.us
FLORIDA KEYS
hea of Critlol State Concern I tcld OfWe
32399-2100
291.0781
GREEN SWAhfP
ARI of Critical 51ak Concern Field Office
. . ..-r
. . . . . r .___. r..:.- .n.
Ms. Linda A. DeVine
December 14, 1999
Page Two
Any resulting
resulting
from the military
transition
training.
project
improvement costs become a part of .the DOT's
Transportation
Work Program to establish
the amount of local,
state and federal
funds committed and projected
to meet these
Please
refer
to
the
enclosed
DOT
comments.
needs.
Based on the information
contained
in the notification
intent
and the enclosed comments provided
by our reviewing
agencies,
the state has determined'that
the above-referenced
project
is consistent
with the Florida
Coastal Management
Program.
In addjtion,
Regional Planning
of their
Strategic
proposed activity.
planning
councils
of
the Treasure Coast and Southwest Florida
Councils have identified
th.e policies
and goals
Regional Policy Plans which may apply to the
The comments provided
by the regional
are enclosed for your review and consideration.
Thank you for the opportunity
to review this proposal.
If
you have any questions
regarding
this letter,
please contact
Ms.
Cherie Trainor,
Clearinghouse
Coordinator,
at (850) 414-5495.
Sincerely,
Ralph Cantral,
Executive
Director
Florida
Coastal Management Program
RC/cc
Enclosures
cc:
Albert
Roberts,
Department of Transportation
Wayne Daltry,
Southwest Florida
Regional Planning Council
Liz Gu;ick,
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
Florida Defmrtment
-r
JEB BUSH
GOVERNOR
of Trutiportation
605 Suwannee
Tallahassee,
Florida
Street
32399-0450
THOMAS
F. BARRY,
SECRETARY
JR
Aviation Office
Mail Station 46
September 21, 1999
mm.
-w
U.
Ms. Cherie Trainor
Coordinator
Florida State Clearinghouse
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
p., !‘>.
/i$i ‘j$ G= ..,
i&y
.’ ::.:.;,;’ -.; .G _,.,,
qj3
JY;,.
?.? jgLqL9 . y :.
%.:$& F
i
’ h!p;,
I’ ‘lia
I..
pj
.A.+*< .+. .- ,
: .s,-: ‘...a/, .
._. ?;.. L,,
‘.I ,-.
ICAR Review Comments, FL 99090807446: Department of the Air Force>
Preparation of Environmental Assessrrient to Evaluate Potential Environmental
Impacts Resultivg from the Beadown of 7-6A Aircraft at Moody AF,B, GA
..
_..
‘.
:.
..
: .
_.
.:_
..
Dear Ms. Trainor:
.
.
The Department of Transportation, Aviation Office has reviewed the summary of
proposed actions involved in the beddown of T-6A aircraft at Moody AFB, GA as they
relate to Florida’s public aviation transportation systeni and offer the following
comments.
Re:
.n”
1.
-.
Training activities that use the existing Live’Oak Militav Operations Area and Military
Training Routes should not effect instrument Flight Rules operations of the state’s
aviation system as no changes to existing lateral’ or vertical boundaries are specified.
The effect to civil Visual Flight Rules traffic operations in this area should not be
significant provided real time use information and flight following is available from the
air traffic control system.
The Environmental Assessment should specifically address the socioeconomic impact
transition training may have on each of the three civil facilities and its surrounding area.
Changes to approved Noise Impact contour maps of airport Master Plans or Part 150
Noise Programs resulting from T-6A flight operations must be considered. Noise
contour maps are normally included in Florida local government land use codes for
airport compatibility zoning. The impact of increased flight traffic on existing facility
capabilities and planned capacity improvement projects at each facility should also be
WVJVJ
dI-lt
StFltF!
fi.llS
6
RECYCLED
PAPER
Ms. Cherie Trainor
September 21, 1999
Page Two
examined. Airport Master Plans should reflect any airport capacity issues necessary to
support increased operations resulting from the military transition training. Any
resulting project improvement costs become a part of the Florida Department of
Transportation Work Program to establish the amount of local, state and federal funds
committed and projected to meet these needs.
If you have any questions concerning these comments, please do not hesitate to call
me at (SO)41 4-4507.
$?jYg&
.
Land Use Planning Manager
ARiajr
CC: William J. Ashbaker, P.E., State Aviation Manager
Faye Bowling, Manager, Lake City Municipal Airport
Gene Cierkin, Director, Gainesville/Alachua County Regional Airport Authority
David Pollard, Operations, Tallahassee Regional Airport
Sandra Whitmire, FDOT ICAR Coordinator
-I
II
STATE
-7
DEPARTMENT
“Dedicated
-a
,...(i
-.
COMMUNITY
Floiida
a better
p/ace
AFFAIRS
to call
home”
STEVEN M.
February
Ms. Linda A. DeVine
Department
of the Air Force
Headquarters
Air Combat Command
Environmental
Analysis
Branch
HQ ACC/CEVP
129 Andrews Street,
Suite
102
Langley
Air
Force Base, Virginia
RE:
-.
Dear Ms.
-*
to making
FLORIDA
JEB BUSH
Governor
-1
-.
OF
OF
3,
SEIBERT
Secretary
2000
23665-9434
U.S. Department
of the Air Force - Draft
Environmental
- Joint
Primary
Aircraft
Training
System
Assessment
(JPATS)/T-GA
Beddown - Moody Air Force Base, Georgia
Of Interest
to the State
of Florida
SAI:
FL199909080744CR
-
DeVine:
The Florida
State
Clearinghouse,
pursuant
to Presidential
Executive
Order 12372, Gubernatorial
Executive
Order 95-359,
the
16
U.S.C.
SS
1451-1464,
as
amended,
Coastal
Zone Management
Act,
and the National
Environmental
Policy
Act,
42 U.S.C.
§§ 4321,
4331-4335,
4341-4347,
as amended,
has coordinated
a review
of the
above-referenced
project.
The Department
of Agriculture
and Consumer Services
(DACS)
offers
several
comments regarding
the proposal.
The DACS'
Division
of Forestry
requests
to be kept informed
as increases
in
utilization
of these
facilities
are implemented.
Please
refer
to
the enclosed
DACS comments.
Based on the information
contained
in the draft
environmental
assessment
and the enclosed
comments provided
by
our reviewing
agencies,
the state
has determined
that
the abovereferenced
action
is consistent
with the Florida
Coastal
Management
Program.
2555
SHUMARD
OAK
BOULEVARD
. TALLAHASSEE,
FLORIDA
Phone:
850.488.8466iSuncom
278.8466
FAX:
850.921.0781/Suncom
Internet
address:
http://www.dca.state.fl.us
FLORIDA KEYS
Area of Critical Slate Concern Field Office
2796 Overseas Highway, Suite 212
Marathon, Florida 33050-2227
32399-2100
291.0781
Ms. Linda A. DeVine
February
3, 2000
Page Two
Thank
environmental
this
letter,
Coordinator,
you
for the opportunity
to review
the draft
If you have any questions
regarding
assessment.
please
contact
Ms. Cherie
Trainor,
Clearinghouse
at (850) 414-5495.
Sincerely,
Ralph Cantral,
Florida
Coastal
Executive
Director
Management
Program
RC/cc
Enclosures
cc:
Jack
Dodd,
Department
of
Agriculture
and Consumer
Services
i-
DATE:
COUNT/: MoodyAFB
Message:
WATER MAVGEMENT
STATE AGENCIES
Outer
Ckmtincn~l
Shotf
DUE
Sllwanttee River WMD
Bxplorntlon,
Omlopmcnt
DXl?Er
OPB POLICY UNITS
Environmental
PolkylC
Project
U.S.
L ED
___-
_ __---
Direst Ft&ral ActMty (IS CFR 930, Subpart c). Fodoral AgencJed are
requlnd ta fumlsh a conscistency debrminaUon for the State’s
coneurronoe or QbJtcrtion.
ActivWn (15 CFR 930,
oonsistenoy certification
CLEARANCE
12/23/1999
01/06/2000
Q1/20/2000
WCS:
OISTRICTS
The atteched document requir66 a Cram ZtW6 Marwement ActlFlarlda
Coedal Managamnt Pmgrvn con6tstency evalutatfon and Is mtagorlred
as one of the followlna:
Federal A66&tn6ct to Stale or Lowl GovsrnmPnl(i5 CFR 930. Subpart F).
Agenci66 arerequired ta ev6lUate the con6ir;tency of th6 activity.
-
DUE-2
No&vast Aorlda WD
Soti Florltia WMD
Boudweet Notida WD
St. Johns River VW0
X Agriculture
Community Affaim
ErIvlrQn~qnlal ProtuQtiQn
Fish & WildIii Cower% Comm
State
1nulsporlati0n
AL
CWMENTS
Description:
Deporbnerrt
of the Air Force
- DmR
Envirumnental Assmrrm?nt - Joint Primary
AiruaR Training System (JPATS)n=6A Beddown
- Moody Air Force Base. Georgia - Of lnterert to
the State of Florida.
or Pruductlon
subpaftE)-O@emtors
am required
to cwovicle
a
for staM corlcurrwrcefobjedan.
Federal Llcenrcing or Permitting Activity (15 CFR 330, Subpart D). Such
pro)eoll will only be wW6t6d for consi6t6ncy when thele i6 not 8n
analagam
side
IlcOnrO
Or pormk
-
To: Florlda State Clearlnghouse
EO. 72372lNEPA
Department of Community Affairs
2656 Shumard Oak B&vsrd
Tallaha~coe, FL 323982100
(850) 922-5438
( SC 2924438)
0 Not Applicable
(850) 414-0479 (FAX)
.-.
-
.--. -----
-,
Division of Forestry
For64 Resow33 Planning
& SUDDOR Services Bureau
3125 ConnerBlvd., Mait stop C23
From:
Tallahassee,
DivisionlBurew;
Reviewer:
Date:
FL 32399-l
650
Federal Consistency
~Commant/Consistent
OnsistenKomments
Attached
q inconsistent/Comments Attached
/J Not Applicable
Comments Regarding: FL ~99909080744CR
Dueto
my past experience
in the line of Aviation and Aviation Safety I offer &SC
comments to the chaqcs to bc ~pft~cnttd
at Moody AFB. In regardsto the in~rcascxl
traffic to be Lake City Airport and the Live Oak MO& the traffic above the 8000 foot
floor of the MOA should cause no significant impact, but the increase to the trafFic
pattern of the Lake city Airport
will be rignificant.
The Division of Fore&y utilizes the
Cii Airport as a Tanker Base during dangerousfire conditions. We also have a
patrol aircraf!tbased there year round. Lake City is an uncontrolled Airport, which mu
there is no hard fast rule for opersting in that airspace, only recommendations made by
the Airum’s informationManual.Whenthe PrivateControl Tower is not operating, and
weather is above minimums to meet instrument requirements,aircr& have been observed
to not use published common fiquencies. The airport is located in the edge of Lake City
congestedarea hcreased air traffic will have significant impact over congestedareas
with low level approachesto theeast,andtake-oE$to the west.TheDivision has a
facility with a tower at the endof the primary runway at Lake City.
Lake
Regarding the use of VR-1065, which will utilize airspacefrom 500 feet to 1500 feet
above grcnmd level, the Division of Forestry has single-engine patrol aircrafl, w&h fly
cxtcnsivcly at these altitudes. Much of the pilot’s time is sptnt dbserving and seoukg for
activity on the ground. Even with diligence in the sco rind be seenscenario,
conflicts
with
the speedy T-34 Navy aircraft has brought anxiety at times. Now we are to be faced with
mote of these speedy TdAs at low altitude kern the Air Force over forested areas the
Division spends a lot of patrolling. The proposal shows a pcstential increase of ten times
the presentrmmbers.Diligerrtpre-flightgivesgoodwarningof whentheseroutesareto
beused. but they are never where you think they should have been.We will spend more
time in seeandbe seen,thangroundobservationfor potential fire hazards.
The Division of Fore&y should bekept abreastasincreasesin utiliz&on of these
fiacilitiesarc implemented and observethe effects to main&in a safe environment.
submitlai by : Pdcy Lighl
A ’ . - * tion
Divisionof Foresty
(850) 414-9971
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
OFFICE OF STATE BUDGET
."i.
HEHRY E BROWN. JR.
cnAlRmhN.wAYsAM)Huwcarnin-rEE
RlcHARDW.KFILY
ACKNOWLEDGEMRNT
I.
September 30,1999
Ms. Linda A. DeVine
Chief
Environment$ Analysis Branch
HQ ACC/CEVP
129 Andrews Street, Suite 102
Langley AR3 VA 23665-9434
m..
Project Name: beddown of T&A Aircraft at Moody Air Force Base, Georgia, The proposed
action would involve the beddown of 45 T -6A.
Project Number: SC99091l-188
SuspenseDate: 11/4/99
Dear Ms. DeVine,
Receipt of the above referenced project is acknowledged. The Office of State Budget,
has initiated an intergovernmental review of this project. You will be notified of the
results of this review by the suspense date indicated above. South Carolina state
age&s are reminded that if additional budget authorization is needed for this project,
two copies of the completed GCR-1 form and two copies of the project proposal must
be submitted to this office. This action should be initiated immediately, if required.
You should use the State Application Identifier number in your correspondence with
our office reguarding this project. Contact me at (803) 734-0485 ifqyou have any questions.
r
,’
JGHN DRUMMOND
L’HABtMAN. sl3wrE
KICK KELLY
FXEJXllVE
FIJNNL~
CDMMrnE
DJRKJYJR
November 9,1999
Ms. Linda A. DeVine
Chief
Environmental Analysis Branch
HQ ACC/CEVP
129 Andrews Street, Suite 102
Langley AFE VA 236659434
Project Name: beddown of TdA Aircraft at Moody Air Force Base, Georgia, The proposed
action would involve the beddown of 45 T -6A.
Project Number: SC990911-188
Dear Ms. DeVine,
The Office of State Budget, has conducted an intergovernmental review on the
above referenced activity as provided by Presidential Executive Order 12372. All
comments received as a result of the review are enclosed for your use.
The State Application Identifier number indicated above should be used in any future
correspondence with this office. If you have any questions call me at (803) 7340485.
Sincerely,
Grants Services Coordinator
Enclosures
Fax (803)
734-0645
IzlOOl
STATlE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
OFFICE OF STATE BUDGET
RICK KFLLY
m-D-
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
January27,200O
Ms. Linda A DeVine
Chief
EnvironmentalAnalysisBranch
HQ ACCKEVP
129Andrews &eel, Suite 102
LangleyAFB VA 23665-9434
ProjectName: Findingof no SignificantImpact EnvironmentalA$sessment@A) Joint
Primary Aircraft TrainingSystem(JPATS)T- 6A ‘Beddown Moody Air Base
GA
StateApplicationIdentifier SCOOOlOll-015
Suspense
Date:
3/l 2/2000
Dear Ms. DeVine:
Receiptof the abovereferkncedprojectis acknowledged.The Of&e of StateBudget, Grant
ServicesUnit, hasinitiatedan intergovernmentalreview of this-project. You will be notifkd of the
resultsof this reviewby the suspensedateindicatedabove.SouthCarolinastate agenciesare
remindedthat if additionalbudgetauthorizationis neededfor this project, three copiesof the
completedGCR-1 form andtwo copiesof the project proposalmust be submittedto this office. This
action shouldbe inihatedimmediately,if required.Pleaseincludethe StateApplicationIdentifier
numberin any correspondence
with our office regardingthis project. Ifyou haveanyquestions
pleasecontact me at 734-0485.
;~~r4ti-Grant ServicesSupervisor
Fax(803)7344645
-.--
_
--
-_- ..._.. .__....