HomeNewsArticle Display

EA for the expansion of AMOC at March ARB

The 452 Aerial Port Support Flight (APSF) has been called upon several times recently by HHQ AMC 618 TACC to support Contingency and Special Assignment Airlift Mission taskings, at multiple Southern California Naval Air Stations

The 452 Aerial Port Support Flight (APSF) has been called upon several times recently by HHQ AMC 618 TACC to support Contingency and Special Assignment Airlift Mission taskings, at multiple Southern California Naval Air Stations

March Air Reserve Base, Calif. --

The Air Force has prepared this EA in coordination with the CBP addressing potential

environmental impacts of the Proposed Action at March Air Reserve Base (ARB), California, located

approximately 15 miles south of San Bernardino, California, 70 miles east of Los Angeles, California

and 100 miles north of San Diego, California. The Proposed Action is to construct a 25,000 ft2 single

story administrative building immediately adjacent and north of an existing building to meet the square

footage presently required for the anticipated personnel and uses of the facility to meet mission

requirements of AMOC. Two existing modular buildings would also undergo minor renovations to the

exterior providing an appearance more conducive to the co-located permanent structures. The proposed

action also includes a 2.5acre parking lot for the administrative building, a warehouse, and a static

display Air and Marine Park on real property operated by the AFRC at March ARB.

CBP prepared an EA in 2011, the 2011 Environmental Assessment for Proposed Construction,

Maintenance, and Operation for the Expansion of the Customs and Border Protection, Air and Marine

Operations Center Expansion, March Joint Air Reserve Base, Riverside, California (CBP 2011) in

anticipation of expansion of its operations and to facilitate the transfer of 8.38 acres from the City of

Moreno Valley to the March ARB. The Proposed Action in the CBP 2011was constructing a two-story

building, roughly 90,000 square feet (ft2) in size with additional asphalt parking. The proposed action

was to accommodate a growth in mission for border security and an anticipated growth of the AMOC

operation to 700 personnel. This EA is tiered on that CBP 2011 Final EA.

Since 2011 the AMOC mission has changed, requiring less growth in personnel to only 326 personnel.

This has resulted in a reduction in the requirements first envisioned in 2011. However, there is still a

need for additional actions. The purpose of the proposed action is to meet the facility requirements of

the AMOC so it may perform its mission by accommodating the full 326 person contingent, provide

additional warehouse space within close proximity to the mission in a secured environment and to

provide adequate parking for the personnel and visitors to the center. As envisioned in 2011, a park is

also proposed to allow a display of AMOC related aircraft and equipment used in performance of its

mission over the years.

This EA addresses the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects on the natural, social, economic, and

physical environments resulting from the assessed alternatives. The information provided in this EA

will serve as the basis for March ARB to determine whether the Proposed Action would have a

significant impact(s) on the environment, thereby requiring an Environmental Impact Statement and a

Record of Decision of have no significant impacts, which would result in a Finding of No Significant

Impact. The EA also addresses the compliance of the Proposed Action with all applicable

environmental statutes, such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.),

as amended, and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (54 U.S.C. § 300101 et seq.),

as amended.

All public comments received on the Draft EA were considered in drafting the Final EA. The Air Force

addressed all substantive comments, which include comments that challenge the environmental analysis,

methodologies, or information in the Draft EA as being inaccurate or inadequate; identify impacts not

analyzed, or mitigations not considered. Non-substantive comments are considered those that express a

conclusion, an opinion, or a vote for or against the proposal or some aspect of it, state a political position, or

otherwise state a personal preference.