Record of Decision; Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant (VAAP) Proposed Disposal; Chattanooga, TN

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

Record of Decision; Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant (VAAP)

Proposed Disposal; Chattanooga, TN

Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy

Act (NEPA) of 1969, the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations

(40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and GSA Order PBS P 1095.4E,F,2, PBS 1096.4C,

ADM 1020.1, GSA has prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

for this Proposal Disposal Action. The purpose of the EIS was to:

Identify the alternatives considered including the Proposed

Disposal Alternative;

Solicit public comments through scoping and incorporate comments

into the analysis and decision process;

Identify potential impacts of the alternatives considered including

direct, indirect and cumulative impacts;

Disclose all potential impacts resulting from the alternatives

considered;

Identify measures to mitigate adverse impacts; and

Incorporate the impacts from the alternatives considered and

mitigation into the decision process.

This Record of Decision (ROD) will communicate GSA's decision on

implementing the Proposed Action, the basis for that decision, and

identify mitigation measures to be implemented as part of the decision.

The Draft and

[[Page 49806]]

Final EIS documents are incorporated into this ROD by reference, and

are available upon request from GSA.

Action

This is the Record of Decision for the General Services

Administration (GSA) Proposed Disposal of the 6,372-acre (approximate

acreage) Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant (VAAP), also known as

Volunteer, located in the City of Chattanooga, Tennessee. Special

legislation will permit conveyance of 1033 acres directly to Hamilton

County. GSA's action is the administrative act of transferring

ownership of this property through one, or a combination of, disposal

mechanisms. The Proposed Action does not include GSA control of the

reuse of any property other than certain deed restrictions that GSA may

record for the protection of human health and the environment or the

protection of historical and archaeological resources. Some of the

property may be transferred under early transfer authority and this

would require approval from the Governor of Tennessee. Disposal

mechanisms available to GSA include; transferring property to other

Federal agencies; conveying property to state or local governments and

institutions; and conveying the property to private entities.

Disposal of the property by GSA would remove the property from

Federal ownership except for any parcel that may be transferred to

another Federal Agency. The property after transfer becomes subject to

the City of Chattanooga and Hamilton County land use plans and taxing

authority. All future development after transfer will be subject to

local land-use controls. GSA has evaluated two alternatives as part of

the EIS including the No-Action Alternative, and the Disposal

Alternative.

Purpose and Need

The purpose of the Proposed Action is to better utilize assets. The

need for the Proposed Action is to eliminate Federal expenses on

unneeded property, to free capital for higher priorities, and to return

property to the private sector and the local taxing authority for

beneficial reuse.

The Department of Defense (DOD) screened the property against the

needs of other DOD agencies and has determined Volunteer to be excess

to the Department's needs. Having been determined to be excess by the

DOD, the Army executed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with GSA for the

disposal of VAAP in accordance with the Federal Property and

Administrative Services Act of 1949. GSA has screened the property for

use by Federal civilian agencies and determined that the property is

surplus to the needs of the Federal government.

The property is currently underutilized, and under the Proposed

Action, would become a productive asset for future growth and

development within the local community. As part of the NEPA process,

GSA consulted with the local community to promote a smooth transfer and

productive reuse of the property.

GSA issued a Draft EIS in April with publication in the Federal

Register, and provided a 45-day public comment period that began on

April 15, 1999. A final Public Meeting was held in Chattanooga on April

29 soliciting comments on the Draft EIS.

The Final EIS addressed comments received on the Draft and was

released on July 30 for final comment. This comment period closed on

August 30. GSA provided written notices of availability of these

documents in the Federal Register, the Chattanooga Free Press, and

through local libraries. GSA distributed approximately 250 copies of

the Draft and Final EIS to Federal agencies, state and local

governments, elected officials, the business community, and to

interested parties.

GSA made diligent efforts to solicit input from all potentially

impacted parties, and GSA also made diligent efforts to keep the

community fully informed during the NEPA process. This was accomplished

using newspaper Public Notices, newsletter direct mailings, community

meetings, written correspondence, Public Meetings, and through

maintaining an open dialogue with representatives of the City of

Chattanooga and Hamilton County. GSA communicated regularly and openly

with the community to keep all parties fully informed during the

process. The chronology of the scoping events is outlined in the Draft

EIS I-C.

Alternatives Considered

No-Action Alternative

Under the No-action Alternative, the Federal Government would

retain the property with continuing Federal ownership and maintenance

responsibilities. However, because Volunteer is no longer operational

or needed for its original purpose, this alternative would maintain the

majority of the property as undeveloped. Existing leases would

continue, and new leases would likely be negotiated. Tenant leases

would remain in the industrial area of the site with access to the

existing utility infrastructure and the transportation network. There

are currently 21 tenant leases at Volunteer, which employ approximately

300 people. Federal responsibilities would include the provision of a

caretaker and expenses of upkeep for grounds and building maintenance,

security, and utility services. In the absence of a productive Federal

use for the property, the costs for continuous upkeep would represent

an expense to the taxpayer, although some of this cost would be offset

by tenant rents. However, the local community would not realize the

benefits of this property returning to the local taxing authority for

beneficial reuse.

Disposal Alternative

General Considerations

The Disposal Alternative is the proposed action by the Federal

Government. This is the GSA preferred alternative. The conveyance to

local governments or institutions for reuse or sale would be

accomplished in accordance with the Federal Property and Administrative

Services Act. The Disposal Alternative would result in indirect and

longer-term impacts that would occur over time. Indirect impacts are

those that are ``reasonably foreseeable'' as long range consequences of

the action. As defined in 40 CFR 1508.8, indirect impacts may include

environmental impacts attributable to changes in population density and

land uses that are induced by the Proposed Action.

Land use scenarios (A, B, C and D) were developed in the

preparation of the Draft and Final EIS in partnership with the City and

County to provide a mechanism by which potential impacts from future

site reuse could be evaluated. GSA worked closely with stakeholders

that included the City of Chattanooga, Hamilton County, the Regional

Planning Agency, Tennessee Department of Transportation, (TDOT),

Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA) and other interested

agencies to assess potential uses for the site. Because the local

community will ultimately determine the use of this property through

zoning ordinance, their input was critical to this process. The City of

Chattanooga annexed the entire Volunteer site in April 1998.

As part of GSA's analysis, land use scenarios were developed to

provide likely combinations of land uses reflecting the needs of the

community communicated during the NEPA scoping process. Land use

Scenario D was developed for the Final EIS in response to both agency

and public comments made on the Draft. Although

[[Page 49807]]

the analysis of direct impacts from the Disposal Alternative is

relatively straightforward and consistent regardless of the potential

land use scenarios, the analysis of indirect impacts requires

consideration of each respective scenario.

Identifying and evaluating potential indirect impact for each

scenario involves a certain amount of speculation and assumptions

because type, timetable, and location of future development at

Volunteer is not known. To conduct a thorough analysis of reasonably

foreseeable impacts resulting from disposal and development, GSA

established criteria to identify and evaluate potential impacts as

discussed below.

It will take several decades for the entire property to achieve

complete reuse, and it is not possible to evaluate impacts accurately

over such a timeframe. GSA in consultation with the local governments

determined that a five to fifteen-year timeframe was a ``reasonably

foreseeable'' period within which impacts would be identified and

assessed. This decision was based on reasonably foreseeable land uses

that could be implemented near the latter part of this timeframe. For

example, two of the development scenarios include a municipal landfill

that would not be opened for 10 to 12 years.

The local governments will develop zoning for the Volunteer

property and will be the legal authority for reviewing and approving

plans for future development after Federal disposal. Therefore, the

local and state governments were determined to be the guiding source

for data and assumptions related to potential future activity during

the five to fifteen-year time frame.

It is important to note that GSA's role in the disposal process is

strictly to conduct the real estate transaction(s) and perform the

various related functions required under Federal law. The GSA has no

financial, material, or other interest in the future use of the land

after disposal. More expressly, GSA is not advocating any particular

conceptual or proposed reuse options for Volunteer. GSA analyzed

competing land use proposals and the issues associated with these

potential uses through the development of potential land use scenarios.

Key Land Use Proposals

The VAAP property consists of two dissimilar halves. The western

half is a broad valley where the bulk of the former TNT manufacturing

facilities was located. The eastern half of the property is primarily

undeveloped with the exception of earthen covered ammunition bunkers

dispersed throughout the hilly terrain. Due to the constraints imposed

on future uses of the western half and existing contamination in this

area, all three potential land use scenarios proposed by the local

community generally include the same set of compatible uses (primarily

industrial) for the western half. Potential land use scenarios for the

eastern half of VAAP offer greater diversity in future uses.

The three initial land use scenarios are summarized in Chapter II

Section 3 of the DEIS. Scenario D is summarized in Appendix F-3 of the

Final. Each of the scenarios calls for a particular mix of future land

uses. However, because of specific expressions of interest by the local

Cooperating Agencies, key features have been identified which are

included in one or more of the potential scenarios developed. These key

features, or proposed uses, include the following: a large premiere

industrial site; industrial development areas; a new I-75 interchange

and access roads; mixed use sites; educational facilities; Army Reserve

facilities; Police/Fire Training Center; a solid waste municipal

landfill; residential areas; active recreation areas; an Equestrian

Center; opportunity sites; open spaces; passive recreation; wildlife

habitat; and public use areas. These key features are summarized in

Chapter II Section B.2. of the DEIS and Appendices F-3 and F-4.

Four Potential Land Use Scenarios Developed

Three potential land use scenarios (A, B, and C) are illustrated in

Exhibits II-2 through II-4 of the Draft EIS, with the legend for all

three in Exhibit II-1 of the Draft. Scenario D was developed for the

Final and is discussed in text and tables. Exhibit E-2 of the Final

summarizes the acreage allocated to proposed uses for each scenario,

and the percentage of the site devoted to each land use.

In order to evaluate traffic impacts and the need for

transportation improvements, a phasing plan was developed for 5, 10,

and 15 year planning horizons for each land use scenario. In general,

the four scenarios are illustrated in the Draft and Final EIS with key

features are summarized as follows:

Scenario A

Scenario A does not include residential development areas or the

Equestrian Center. It provides a 490-acre site for a proposed sanitary

landfill. It also provides the second largest amount of acreage for

open space and passive recreation in the eastern half of VAAP among the

four scenarios.

Scenario B

Scenario B does not include the landfill, the Police/Fire Training

Center, the Equestrian Center, or the opportunity sites. It provides

the largest amount of space for residential development located in the

eastern half of the site.

Scenario C

Scenario C includes a 490-acre landfill site, the Police/Fire

Training Center, the Equestrian Center, with only about half the

acreage for residential development compared to Scenario B.

Scenario D

Scenario D does not include residential use areas, the landfill,

opportunity sites, the Police/Fire Training Center, or the Equestrian

Center. It provides the largest amount of open space for passive

recreation among the four scenarios, retaining the entire eastern half

of VAAP in its current state.

Scenarios A, B, and C assume that a new I-75 interchange would be

constructed to serve VAAP and as a connector to State Route 58.

Scenario D does not include the interchange and therefore development

opportunities for the site are severely limited. This is clearly

demonstrated by the tables in Appendix F-4 of the Final, which show

that the absorption rates for the industrial land are less than 40% for

Scenario D, as compared to Scenarios A, B, and C. Scenario D is very

similar to the No Action Alternative because of the limitations to

potential reuse if additional access to I-75 is not provided.

Environmental Consequences and Mitigation

Based on the analysis contained in the EIS, there were no

potentially significant environmental impacts identified from either

the Proposed Action or the No Action except for those discussed in this

ROD. The primary mitigation measures for the impacts from this action

were identified during the scoping process and the preparation of the

EIS. The partnership formed between the City and County governments and

GSA during the planning for this disposal provided ongoing input for

the preparation of the EIS. This EIS process solicited ideas from the

community for the property's reuse and facilitated the development of

combinations of proposed uses from which to analyze potential impacts.

The result was the development of four basic land use plans that will

provide the

[[Page 49808]]

local community a long-range planning tool for use as it develops its

reuse strategy.

Three additional site considerations and potential impacts will be

mitigated through processes required as discussed below. First, the

entire Volunteer property is listed as a State of Tennessee Superfund

Site. The Army is currently investigating and cleaning the contaminated

areas as part of their legal responsibility under the Installation

Restoration (IR) program and under RCRA as described in Chapter III.B.7

in the Draft. This process requires close coordination with regulatory

agencies and with the public. A Restoration Advisory Board has been

established and is holding regular meetings that are open to the

public. GSA's proposed disposal would have no effect on the status of

the site investigation and cleanup efforts being conducted under the IR

and RCRA programs. Some of this property may be transferred under early

transfer authority and would require approval of the Governor. This

process is explained in detail in the Draft EIS pages 1-11 to 1-12.

Secondly, two of the proposed scenarios include a 490-acre site for

a sanitary landfill. Should the local community elect to proceed with

this option, an extensive permitting process and public notification

process would be mandatory. This would require extensive engineering

and design studies, a closure plan, and permitting under Tennessee Rule

1200-1-7 Solid Waste Processing and Disposal Facilities. This required

process would solicit additional community participation and the

permitting requirements would serve to mitigate potential adverse

impacts to the natural and human environment.

Third, three of the scenarios developed propose a new I-75 traffic

interchange at VAAP. An Interchange Justification Report for this

interchange would be required pursuant to Federal Highway

Administration (FHA) regulations. This report would be prepared by

Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) and submitted to FHA for

approval. An environmental assessment would be required along with

site-specific studies and public involvement, which would serve to

mitigate impacts from the development of a new interchange at VAAP.

The NEPA process itself and the joint development of a series of

land use scenarios became the major mitigation measure that will serve

to minimize the impacts to the natural and human environment. GSA

consulted with other State and Federal Agencies to identify impacts and

develop mitigation measures. Neither the disposal alternative nor the

no-action alternative was considered to be environmentally preferred

over the other. Potential impacts to the natural and human environment

were found to be not significant after mitigation. This is documented

in both the Draft and the Final EIS by reference, and a summary of

mitigation by the Agency is attached as part of this ROD.

Rationale for Decision

1. As part of GSA's environmental review, GSA conducted extensive

public scoping with the local community to identify potential impacts

and concerns that would result from proceeding with the proposed

disposal action.

2. Issues that were identified by the community through Public

Meetings and correspondence and were addressed in both the Draft and

the Final Environmental Impact Statements released for public comment

and review. Issues were addressed in the NEPA documents and all

comments and GSA responses are incorporated into the documents as part

of the official record.

3. GSA consulted with other government agencies including local,

State, and Federal Agencies, to solicit their input on the proposed

disposal. All issues identified and responses provided are presented in

the Draft and Final documents.

4. The development of proposed reuses for the Volunteers property

enabled potential uses to be identified and impacts to be analyzed. The

EIS process provided a tool by which potential impacts were identified

and mitigation measures developed. No significant impacts to the

natural or human environment were identified from this proposed

disposal action.

5. Potential impacts have been identified and mitigation measures

selected that will minimize the impacts from this disposal action. GSA

has consulted with other Agencies in the development of mitigation

measures. GSA will institute the identified mitigation measures and

will consult with other Agencies to insure that mitigation measures are

implemented.

6. Should potentially significant impacts be later identified that

may reach significant levels, GSA will prepare supplementary

documentation as mitigation as required by the National Environmental

Policy Act.

Therefore, having given consideration to all of the factors

discovered during the 12 month environmental review process, it is

GSA's decision to proceed with the Proposed Action: Disposal of the

Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant based on the Federal Property and

Administrative Services Act of 1949 as amended.

Dated: August 30, 1999.

Phil Youngberg,

Regional Environmental Manager, Southeast Sunbelt Region, General

Services Administration.

[FR Doc. 99-23808 Filed 9-13-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-23-M