PART III- ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP86-00244R000100190023-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 11
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 26, 2000
• Sequence Number: 23
• Content Type: REGULATION

*USAF Declass/Release Instructions On File*
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 :'CIA-RDP86-00244R000100190023-1
Nftme 1000,
PART I!I - ENVIi;C~i'?1ME:I~JTAL ~``' X44 l =hrr
This statement is issued in compliance wiilr the memorandum from the Secretary
of Defense doted 8 August 1.970 in reference to the National Environmenial Policy Act
of 199; Executive Order 11514; arid tine Interim Guidelines for Statements on Major
Federal Actions Affecting the Environment published by the Council on Environmental
Quality.
The memorandum requests an Environmental Staternent for proposed acctions, if,
in the opinion of the Department of Defense, the action qualifies for such a statement
under either one of the two followings criteria:
(1) A significant adverse environment effect will result from the proposed
action, or
(2) The proposed action is likely to be controversial with respect to envir-
onmental effects.
The Department of the Air Force forsees no adverse environmentei effects result-
inct from the Master Plan concept of Andrews Air Force Ease and from the construction re-
quit-cc) to implement this plan.
The Department of the Air Force supports the intent of the Environmental Policy
Act to improve the qucility of the environment, and in keeping with the spirit of the Act,
the following general descrip!ior, and information is fur1nishher1 regarding the impact on
the environment from the Waster Plan concept and the ensuing construction involved.
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 CIA-RDP86-00244R000100190023-1
 Approved For Rel se 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244ROQ 00190023-1
2. IMPAC l' OF THE P,"AST[:F: ON THE NATU!'AL ASPECTS OF TI ft
ENV!RONMFNT
a. Predictions of t!re I'roLal'.!o Impact of the Proposed Action on the Environn,en4
(1)
Population. The tah is on the following page ir'.Clicotes the present and
projected lase population. (See "Population Impact", Page 69)
It should he noted that the total employment (civilians, officers and en
listed men) remains approximately 13,0,10. The primary population impact is generated by
the housing requirements for military personnel resulting in an increase of approximately
5,100 dependents.
In turn, the on-base dependents increase will result in demands on util-
ity systems, internal traffic and parking, and construction of on-base community and rec-
reotiorlal facilities.
(2) AircraFt Operations. The accompanying graph summarizes aircraft move-
menu (takeoffs and landings) by month and yearly totals for the post- 3 years (1968 thru 1970,
inclusive). (See "Flight Operations", Page 72)
Figures for 1971 (4 months) indicate a decrease in operations and the
yearly'total is expected to be between the 1968 & 1969 total, say approximately 209,000
movements. This decrease- may he partly attri'r-'uted to the implementation of the Washington
Terminal Control Area (20 August 1970) resulting in more positive control of aircraft in the
area. Monthly arrival and departure missions averac,,e 10,000 to 12,000 not including local
traffic.
Tlie-t conclusion of the Vietnam 'Nor could result in some minor increase
in air. !raffle or Andrews AFri. Any future increase will be more directly related to Air
Force e::per:di ;gyres. The field is cal ;,; lc of l?r,:cilin between 200 000 arid 22';,0''0 n
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244R0001001b0023-1
merits per year and no significon! ci,a go is expected in the forseeohlc future (5 years).
 ~., (. r.. J a~.
O to /..
l ? 1'
O 1
I J
jq
v, N
F? -F.
tt U
C~ W I-
4
z
W L
W
t_
_j
U h
f"UJ
N to
1.1.2
U
to
N -
CZ
LO
-J
O
~to
`J
~ U
W?2
C) [r
W
F- to
N
l L.
tI
a cu
p
V
CL
)prpvedy For R~:1 se $00' %U9403 JC! 4 -R=00244RO 0190023-1
~f C>{ 1rn U'.f Iti!
0 -0
Cr 1
~~S t 1 C... A ttJ ul i -1 ~ , IC) lU
~fp ~ved jbr F~I ease Q0(}?J09 0323 (1A-kb
u t
r E }l,J l _~ ~
 Approved For Relase 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244R000 00190023-1
Missian, PC-1-tonnn (d, and aircro! I a:c-;i ~nrr,c, its i!rdicatc no si inificaIt
chars is Burin, ibis
period.
fh~ terr'uir7 in the area of the base is generally defin~:d as flat to c~eritl,
rolling. Runway end elevatio: s have hec.rr established.as follows:
Cast Runway West Runway
1 R - 252,99'
1 I, - 255.28'
1 9L - 278.42' 19R 273.88'
The established airfield elevations is 279'.
Extended runvray centerline profiles to a distance of?approxirrrately 10
miles from the runway ends indicate the terrain gradually slopes away from the runway ends
to elevations of 200' or less.
Detail profiles of the final 10,000 feet (approximately 2 miles) to the
runway ends indicate no obstructioris wire the exception of natural growth requiring per-
iodic trimming of trees. Clearance easements in the approach-departure clearance surface
at the north and south ends of the field limit the height of structures and permit the removal
of natural growth in the 50:1 glide path to the east and west runways.
In the aerial approach and traffic pattern zones, control of types and
density, height limitation, prevention of smoke or other atmospheric pollution, and elec-
trical distrubances w;tich reduce visil:ility or interfere with the Operation of radio aids and
communications are of major concern: Recent prelirrinary plans by the P,r?NN!CPPC indicate
a desire to zone ri-..e area adjacent to the base in the southern approaches as IndLis ,rial
This does r.ot appear to be in
a green halt plan concept.
the best interests of the government and not in keeping with
Air traffic ill tke area is sco`urated, the result of
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244R0001001-9 iei rf i e Ld s i , r
close prc,xircity as indicated h7 the fotlov.'inq rants: (AAF - Andrews Air Force I;use,
 Approved For Reese 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244R0QQ100190023-1
DIA 4 Dulles Intcrnc~fioncrl Airport, ! ri,.ndsi,ip (ntcrnaliancal Airpc?rt, 1r1NA Wasliin ton
National Airport)
Milcac~e
AAFIIY
DIA
FIA`
MJA
Andi ows l-`;f= tl
-
31
29
9
Owiles Ir,t'1
31
-
45
23
Fries .clslrip Ir t'I
29
45
-
31
Washington National
9
23
31
-
By necessity, available airspace is reduced. Direct affect Upon AAFB
is that less than 10"") of departures from the field, regardless of desfinna!ioo, are in a westerly
direction in order to avoid direct conflicts with Wasl,4igton National Airport.
(3) Noise Abatement. Aircraft are, tH6 major source of noise pollution at
Andrevrs AFC and its surrou;x.Iin;gs. Noise contour maps have been developed in accordance
with 86-5 to graphically show areas affected by aircraft operation. This procedure is
a calculated quantity that permits one to estimate community response to aircraft noise gen--
crated by present or future operario;is and thus, guide zoning decisions.
The first step in this procedure was an actual count of aircraft operations
occurring at Andrews AFE; during the week of 10--16 May 1970. The accompanying table
indicates the total take-offs and landings of jet aircraft during the hours 0700 (7 arr.) -
2200 (10 pr;). One or two engine piston and turboprop aircraft were not considered in this
tabulation since in al '!:lost all i+,stanc?s requiring ov:aluaaion they do not Contribute materially
4
in establishi'xg final Composite Noise Ratings.
Evaluation of existing data indicates the major sources of noise distur::ar,ces
are generated by the take-off of F-8 and F-1 00 aircraft using afterburners on rke east
fl R-1 r.~l.l crr4 Fy operatio:~s of T-33 a -,d -39
T c irc:raft on tie west rLinwu 1 r!?:i, A tr er
rra ~t ,..A rover& - (66 ~_ r~'200lM /t33e~r. iA-RD 8.~ 9 P410RRJPy
}i h9 , 1 90 2 0 iii c>d C -1 1
 Approved_For.,Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244R000100190023-1
AIR ?TRAFFSC (GOO'S)
m
JAN
I
App'
roved For Rellase 2001/09/0 : CIA-RDP86-
 Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244RA100190023-1
aircraft flying at low al tiiudes opproxinu:rtely 5 to 6 mlIns frorn the runway ends. These
flights are irunsporling fneuical patients and supplies. Flight operations average 60'11% on
RW's 1 L Fx 1 IZ and 40,; , on 1 9L & 19P P.
Andrews AFB is aware of the problems relating to noise resulting from
flight operations and the following noise abatement procedures are in effect:
1 . Limit field to mission essential flights from 2200 (10 prn) to
0600 (6 ar:.) .
2. Pilots to take-of'f and climb rapidly to 1500' and maintain
1500' rr~i ninrurn al titude .
3. Special areas designated for engine run-up operations.
4. All complaints are investigated and analyzed and pilots
reprimanded if warranted.
5. Special Noise Abatement Procedures as described are pub-
lished world-wide and are known and applicable to base
and transient aircraft.
A by--produce of equipping the C--135/137 fleet (Boeing 707) with fan
engines has resulted in increased aircraft performance with a reduction of noise and exhaust
emissions. In general, the design of mil,itary aircraft is predicated upon performance and
no significant changes can be forseen in the near future that will greatly reduce noise levels.
Instead, reduction in noise levels at large airports will result from operational controls and/
or mission changes.
The Air Force is cooperating with-FAA to reduce noise levels. In the necr
future, arrivals and departures will be required to maintain higher altitudes as long as pos-
sible resulting in a reduction of noise in the vicinity.
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244R000100190023-1
 Approved For R*{*ase 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244R:O 100190023-1
Ahli)[,'[.- VS I B J[i Ali?CF:/\f=T OPE1'.ATIONJS
SUI'.I.-S-AT, 10._1 iJ/.Y 1970 -?? 0700--2200 IiCoUi)\S
West i?unway
East Rurw:ay
West Runway
East Runway
1L 19i;
1R 19L
1L 19R
1R
19L
A-3
1
3
0
3
2
0
4
0
A-4
3
4
3
0
2
2
5
4
A--5
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
C-9
4
9
0
0
2
10
1
0
C-135/137
10
4
0
0
10
9
2
2.
C-140
20
25
3
2
25
22
3
3
C-141
6
10
2
2
5
10
4
0
F-4
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
2
F-8
12
17
17
6
5
3
25
14
F-9
0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
F --84
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
F-100
3
2
23
22
10
1
17
19
F-101
3
2
0
0
1
0
1
0
F--106
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
T--1
6
7
5
5
0
2
14
9
T-2
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
T-33
36
52
15
4
52
30
16
11
T-37
0
4
0
1
0
2
0
0
T--38
0
3
0
0
1
2
0
0
T -39
41
52
9
2
47
50
7
7
DC-.8
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
(4) Water Quality
(a) Sanitary Sevieraae Collection System and Sewage Treatment Focili'i s.
Existing facilities in present operation consists of three separate systerns, each having its own
treatment plant, Se.va;e collected frc;rn various buildings is, for the most part, conveyed by
gravity throujh terra cot!a or vitrified clay pipes to the treatment plant. Several remote fa--
cili,ies are served by septic tanks. the accompanying chart summarizes operating ch,aroc-
teris`ics of 'he exis'ing plants. All c;xis!ing plants are properly rnai rained and operated.
1 he Potomac Ri .per E nforcer,?.ent Conference recorrmerded !1:w
And' ew. s
Aril l a Apcpr,oved Fpr~Releasec200e1/09/03. ?CIA-RDP86-00244IR00010019 02 y1y 17;earls of citi c r
 Approved For Re jase 2001/09/03: CIA-RDP86-00244ROW00190023-1
(} !' irr IC II C}l cCln'?c C;"IUiI Or by cC?nS`?FUCIio of On-OiasC facilities.. IYIS!irj plants do riot
t ri,v de odva( ::' d treat 1enl I`Negotia!lo:s are presently undcrwoy with the ~` usIiric.ton
r
;~,~ c'rt.c}ir Sani!ar~? LarTlflilsslUrl (;'1550) For Hie conrrer,tian of the on-Luse systern inla the
i c, ~'r nr, and tlhe eventual r-f'rnoval of the on-base treatrfCnt plcar.tS. Anti-
.
r
increases io present flows as deScrihed in the accompanying table are as follows:
.To To
Piscataway Treatment Plant `';esters Trctatrncnt Flan
Frorn From From
On-Base On--Base C)n-base
Plant No. 1 Plant No. 4 Plant 1 1o. 3
fY 70 -- 100 i A Qti's (Under Const) 22,200 GPQ
f %' 72 450 FA Otis 99, 900 OPD
FY 73 -- 300 I 'A Qtr-, 66,600 GPD'
FY xx - 1060 FA Qtrs 166,900 G PD
68,300 GPD
(b) Industrial Waste;. The estimated av4rage industrial water waste is
200,000 GPD vwh a peak flow rate of 300 GP,,,'{. Nast of the industrial waste is the re-
salt of washing and cleaning, corrosion control, and fuel and lubricant handling oper'atiorls.
`,'taste constituents consist mainly of oil, solvents, detergents and paint removal compounds.
Water waste from Ile corrosion control facility is discharged to the
sat!Itory sewer system and treated at sewage treatment plant No. 3. Treatment for other
industrial wastes consist of oil separators to remove free oil. There are 28 small oil ir,ter-
cc:ptors and 11 lame separators which readily remove floatable oil and do not remove deter- .
;er.!s oP emulsified oils and solvents, Effluents from the separators are discharged to the
s'orrl drainage systern. Waste oil recovered from the separators is removed by a waste purrpc:'
truck and transported to two-25,000 gallon oil waste storage tanks at the sanitar,r land fill
. The oil 1n'erceptors and separators are widely dispersed tC,fCl'^ C'Vr
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244R000100190023-1
'tie Pxrsc; thus preec:ludinc3 rite installation, of a separate collection systern for in:iastri'-rl ::D.
 Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244R000100190023-1
i''.cn' No. 1
P lan- No. 3
?lcnr No. 4
Dcily
Design
Capacity
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT CHARACTERISTICS
Avera,~;e
Dully
r l ow
Treo tea'
913,000 GPD 730,000 GPD
480, 000 G PD 329, 500 G PD
125,200 GPD 63,200 G?D
Peck
Daily
Flow
BC.D So`Sds {
1,060,10-0 G ; D 600,000 G P D 91 ~ %
4c C, 000 G D S.
G PD , ; , .
280,000"' P,
100,000 G P D + 70 , 000 G - D 35?-
1 ?
-
a
I--
vl
V
U
W
Q)
EL..
~_
0
/ 1
? ~~
C:I
Base Service
EFrwent Di
~
sc
^arce
Plant '
?lint No
3
1
1
]
1
1
1
3
2
3
3
2
13
Nor;ho,est Section
ikleetiru House 3rancl; (Po or cc River
Y'
.
lan No. 4
1
i
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
5
Eqsf Side
I
in
Ccw Branch (?cuxen~ River ;;csIn)
4
Southwest Section
Paynes Branch tt'ororncc River Ecsi r.j
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244R000100190023-1
 Approved For Rase 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-00244RQQ0100190023-1
{t is i,lnnncd nstr,crd (FY 73) to conned existiti industrial waste: faciliiies into the sar,??
ltary sower system.
(c) Boiler Blowdowr7. No treatment is provided for the boiler blo:r-
down and disVharge is directly into the storm sewer system.
Nbr. of
Estimated
Chemicals added to boilers per month/po:Jrds
Power
Plant
Blowdowil
Per Month
I'1eXar' eta-
phosphate's
Tannin
Salt
,
Caustic
11515,
441000 gals .
456
420
2 , 800
0
1732
35,000 gals.
104
156
2,200
0
3409.
9,500 gals.
38
60
600
0
S-3343
2,100 gals.
68
56
0
40
5-4331
1,900 gals.
52
42
0
24
Connection of the bailer blowdown drainage to the sanitary sewer-
system is included with the proposed WCP project for connecting the industrial waste sep-
orators and inicrceptors to the sanitary sewer system.
(d). Coal Storacte. Runoff from the coal storage area drains into the
Charles Branch (Patuxent River Basin). Included in the FY 72 MCP ore projects for the
conversion or elimination of coal burning heating plants and the subsequent elimination of
the coal yard.
(e) Cooling Towers. Cooling towers for air conditioning water are ser-
viced by commercial contractors and the quantities and types of additives ore not presently
available. A requirement for the maintenance contractor to furnish total information on
cooling tower additivF?s and bleed--offs has been included in the contract for FY 72.
(1) Hazardous t'.'aterials. The storage of the following listed materials
is odequare to pr.eclHe pollution from the facilities N r ' ed or reu}ir~ely
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP86-b014o4Fr ~b~tf'6( 1Y b b2f B. 1