NSC MEETING ON M-X

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 14
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 17, 2009
• Sequence Number: 35
• Publication Date: November 17, 1982
• Content Type: MEMO

Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
!4 E D/Pers
NSC review completed.
USAF review
completed.
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR
Mr. Donald Gregg
Assistant to the Vice President
for National Security Affairs
Mr. .L . Paul Bremer III
Executive Secretary
Department u ` State
Colonel John H. Stanford
Executive Secretary
Department of Defense
November 17, 1982
Dr. Alton Keel
Associate Director for National
Security and International Affairs
Office of Management and Budget
SYSTEM I?
90923
-Mr. Thomas B. Cormack
Executive Secretary
Central Intelligence Agency
Ms. Jacqueline Tillman
Executive Assistant to the U. S~
Rep,.c ` 't ai:ive to the Urj.J tcrd. Nu I.. _? s
Colonel George A. Joulwan
Executive. Assistant to the
Chair nzan
Joint Chiefs of Staff
Mr. Joseph Presel
Executive Secretary
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
Dr. George A. Keyworth
Director, Office of Science
and Technology Policy
SUBJECT: NSC Meeting on M-X (C)
Attached is the summary of the Defense-prepared Legislative Environ-
mental Impact Statement on Closely Spaced Basing, which will be among
the materials provided to the President on this subject. It supplements
the background materials provided earlier for your use in preparing for
the National Security Council meeting scheduled for Thursday,
November 18, 1982, in the Cabinet Room to discuss.M-X. (C)
Michael O. Wheeler
Staff Secretary
CONFIDENTIAL
DECLASSIFY ON: OADR
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
WI HINGTON, tJ.C, 2O 3
4
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
SUMMARY
PROGRAM OVERVIEW
Purpose and Nccd
The United States Air Force proposes to deploy an advanced, land-based,
intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) system known as M-X to improve the
nation's strategic deterrent force. In fulfilling its mission, the Air Force is
dedicated to meeting national defense goals while conserving natural and human
resources. In April 1982, the Armed Services Committee of the Senate requested
the Secretary of Defense to deliver, not later than December 1, 1982, a report on.
the missile development and basing mode selection. An Initial Operational
Capability (IOC) of 1986 has been established.
Previous environmental impact statements on M-X have dealt with five basing
modes:
The purpose of this Legislative Environmental Impact Statement (LEIS) is
to identify and compare potential impacts of M-X deployment in the
mode in alternative geographic locations. As previous environmental
impact statements have revealed, environmental effects for a given basing mode
can only be analyzed in the context of a particular geographic area. This LEIS deals
with potential environmental effects on: Quality of Life, Biology, Air Quality,
Transportation, Energy and Utilities, Hydrology and Water Quality, Mining and
Fossil Fuels, Socioeconomics, Land Use, American Indians, and Cultural Resources.
It is prepared in accordance with Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act.
System Description
may be constructed.
Similarly
(Note: For purposes. of the environmental
analysis, the DA is assum to e This figure is used to account for
potential site variations in terrain, s ape of suitable area, and capsule layout
geometry. The analysis yields worst-case impacts.)
In addition, support facilities are required at a nearby military installation
(OB). Although an existing military installation will support M-X, some additional
facilities will be required onbase for technical and personnel support. The facilities
associated with the deployment area module, are shown in Figure 1...
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
USAF has
denied
this page
-- also
25x5
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83MOO914RO01000110035-5
Selection of Alternatives
System design dictates that certain minimum criteria must be met in order for
the system to operate effectively. These criteria include operational, geotechnical,
and topographic factors. Application of these and other criteria throughout the
United States rr: .Uted in thn identification of alternative siting areas (Figure 2).
These areas could be suappoi?ted by oo~ of ti following DOE) Warren Air Force Base, Cheyenne, Wyoming; Cannon Air Force 'Base, near Clovis,
New Mexico; Nellis Air Force Base/Indian Springs Auxiliary Air Field near Las
Vegas, Nevada; and Hawthorne Army Ammunition Plant in west central Nevada.
Because the suitable DAs for Nellis AFB and Indian Springs AAF are similar and
close together, and because they are both dependent on Las Vegas and Clark County,
the two OBs have been analyzed together, However,, where specific differences
occur as in hydrology, mining, and biology, the direr-i, impacts on each of these
resources are discussed within the full LEIS for each of the two locations.
System Deployment, Operation, and Decommissioning
Construction is expected to start in early 1984, and to be completed by late
1989. The earliest construction will be for facilities needed first or requiring a long
time to complete. These include the technical facilities at the
The requires the longest construction period with
intense activity throughout the construction phase. Construction at the OB will also
being in 1984, but is expected to be most intensive in 1985 and 1986. Subsequent to
1986, the major construction effort will be in the Construction activities
include erection of several types of buildings, road and utility construction, drilling
and tunneling, and construction of below-surface reinforced-concrete structures.
Following facility construction, equipment must be installed and checked to assure
that it will function properly.
Long-term system operations involve status monitoring, routine maintenance,
repair of failed units, continuous trainin , and security. Once a missile is in a
capsule, it generally will be The
operation
This expectation is based upon experience with the
M-X decommissioning would entail a variety of physical, socioeconomic, and
environmental consequences. All decommissioning actions would be in strict
compliance with the laws applicable at the time.
COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
Quality of Life
Quality of life has been used as a general concept to describe personal
satisfaction derived from the total setting in which people live. Here, the quality of
life impact assessment is concerned with those factors that disrupt primary group
relationships, the sense of participation in, and control of civic affairs, and those
factors that erode or eliminate local residents' roles in decisionmaking and their
sense of well-being.
USAF
also 25x5
USAF also
25x5
USAF
also 25x5
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
The quality of life in the candidate ould potentially be affected by 25X2
project-related increases in employment an population. The total employment
impacts of the project would range from 10,000 to 12,000 jobs in the DA, depending USAF also
upon the precise characteristics of the project and the economic structure of the 25x5
regional economy. The implications of these employment effects for local
population change vary from region to region because of labor availability
differences in each area. Local unemployment rates, residence and commuting
patterns, labor force skills, and other economic and demographic factors affect the
magnitude of regional population impacts. Absolute peak-year population impacts in
the OB counties could range from 7,700 to 16,900.
The effect that these levels of in-migration will have on the local quality of
life will depend on the actual magnitude and rapidity of individual community
growth and decline, the affected community's resiliency to that` change, and the
extent to which mitipting measures are actively sought and applied. The more
urbanized counties (e.g., Clark County, Nevada) can cope with changes more easily
than the rural counties (e.g., Mineral County, Nevada). In some cases, the quality of
life may be improved. Even in smaller communities, increased diversification of
industry, goods, and services will provide a wider range of employment
opportunities, shopping facilities, and cultural activities.
The Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative ranks first (results in least,:
impact) for quality of life, followed by the F. E. Warren AFB, Cannon AFB, and
Hawthorne AAP alternatives.
Biology
Projected impacts of ~~deployment on the biological resources of
vegetation, wildlife, aquatic habitats and biota, and threatened and endangered
species generally range from low to negligible for all alternatives. However, there
are several exceptions to this generalization which are described below.
Short-term vegetation impacts range from moderate to high for all
alternatives. For the Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF and Hawthorne AAP
alternatives where revegetation is slow and difficult, these impacts are high and
moderate, respectively, and will persist longer than for the other alternatives due to
the extreme aridity and longer revegetation period required.
Moderate impacts to aquatic biota are associated with the Nellis AFB/Indian
USAF also
25x5
Springs AAF alternative if the is located at Indian Springs AAF. This is due to 25X2
the presence of aquatic habitats in the potential region of influence (ROI) of M-X
deployment (most notably Ash Meadows), that are sensitive to groundwater USAF also
withdrawal. Although significant hydrologic impacts are not anticipated, subtle 25x5
changes in surface water flows as a result of project groundwater withdrawal could
have significant impacts on sensitive aquatic biota. There is also the possibility of
private land development in Ash Meadows as a result of M-X deployment. These
potential impacts can be avoided or decreased through mitigation should this
alternative be selected. The. potential for impact to federally listed threatened or
endangered species is judged to be. low or negligible for all alternatives except
Nellis/AFB Indian Springs AAF. Here potential impacts are moderate due to the
potential of affecting four endangered fish species at Ash Meadows. These potential
impacts can be avoided or decreased through mitigation.
S-5
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
For vegetation, wildlife, and aquatic; habitats and biota, the F. E. Warren AFB
and Cannon AFB alternatives are tied for first (least impact), and the Hawthorne
AAP alternative ranks second. The Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative ranks
last because it would sustain the highest impacts, due principally to the low
resiliency and recovery potential of the vegetation and the moderate potential for
impact to sensitive aquatic resources. For federally listed threatened and
endangered species, the Cannon AFB alternative ranks first and the Nellis
AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative third; the remaining two alternatives. are tied
for second.
Air Quality
During the construction phase the primary project emission sources affecting
air quality will be construction dust and vehicle emissions. Construction dust may
cause local total suspended particulate (TSP) concentrationt in excess of National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). This will probably not be significant duo:
to the temporary nature of the emissions and their limited local influence. Fuel
combustion and vehicle emissions will cause a low impact on air quality- if the
project is not sited in proximity to a sensitive receptor such as a designated
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Class I area or nonattainment area. Wind
erosion from disturbed surfaces could cause a significant impact, particularly for
the Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative, if a revegetation program is not
implemented.
The ranking of alternatives is made on the basis of the estimated probability
of occurrence of significant impacts due to M-X project activities. The F. E.
Warren AFB alternative ranks first with no anticipated significant impacts on any
sensitive receptor. No significant impacts are anticipated with the Cannon AFB
alternative, but the higher potential for wind erosion ranks this alternative second.
The Hawthorne AAP alternative ranks third with a potential for significant effects
on the Gabbs Valley TSP nonattainment area. The Nellis 'AFB/Indian Springs AAF
alternative ranks fourth due to the highest probability of significant impacts in the
Las Vegas Valley, which is a designated nonattainment area for carbon monoxide,
ozone, total suspended particulates, and lead.
Transportation
Transportation resources are the facilities (roads and utilities) that are used to
transport people and goods, and the quality of traffic flow. The ranking of
alternatives is? based upon the anticipated short-term impacts to the existing road
system and current traffic since the potential impacts on railroads and airports are
not expected to be significant. Long-term impacts near the OBs are expected to be
low for all alternatives, and long-term impacts at the DA are expected to be
insignificant. The F. E. Warren AFB alternative ranks first because much of the
suitable area is accessible via Interstate 25 and impacts at the OB are expected to
be low. The Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF and Cannon AFB alternatives are tied
for second, because access roads to the DA will probably experience congestion
during the construction period. The Hawthorne AAP alternative ranks third since
the existing road system which provides access to the base and within the
communities of Hawthorne and Babbitt would be unable to accommodate M-X-
generated traffic during the construction period. As a consequence, severe
congestion would result unless major improvements were made to the street system.
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
Energy and Utilities
v
Energy and utilities resources include potable water and wastewater,
electricity, petroleum supply, telephone communications, solid waste, and natural
gas. Impacts were categorized by issue. The issues are service level, aesthetics,
interference with existing faciliies, nonrenewable energy usage, and compliance
with regulations applicable to solid waste, water treatment, and wastewater
systems. The project alternatives were ranked on the basis of the issue-by-issue
impact magnitudes. For the short-term construction period, Nellis AFB/Indian
Springs AAF is ranked first. The other alternatives, in decreasing order, are Cannon
AFB and F. L Warren tied for second, and Hawthorne AAP last. Short-term
impacts common to all alternatives are those related to aesthetics and
nonrenewable fuel use. The three lower ranked alternatives were further penalized
in the short term because of potential overloading of small community wastewater
facilities, limited capacity potable water facilities, and/or project interference with
existing facilities. Long-terrn impacts for PIternatives are t-^qubl, with continuing
low-level adverse impacts because of the aesthetic effects of new transmission lines
and the usage of nonrenewable energy resources.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Surface water issues include supply availability, downstream flooding and
sediment loading, and water quality. Groundwater issues include supply availability,
water-level declines, aquifer depletion, natural groundwater discharge and recharge,
land subsidence, and water quality. The anticipated magnitude and probable
significance of hydrologic and water-quality impacts were evaluated based on
project construction activities and projected water requirements, and the hydrologic
and water use conditions in each of the alternative areas.
- The amount of water required will depend on the total population in-migration
and varies depending on the alternative chosen. Total water needed during the six-
year construction period, including system use and personal use, could range from
about 25,000 acre-ft to about 45,000 acre-ft, depending on the magnitude of induced
population growth. Requirements at F. E. Warren AFB and Cannon AFB are
projected to be at the upper end of this range, while Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF
and Hawthorne AAP requirements would be near the lower end of the range.
In all the alternatives, potential hydrologic and water-quality impacts will be
greatest during the six-year period of construction when site disturbance and water
use will be highest. During the subsequent operational period, hydrologic and water-
quality impacts are projected to be low and not significant. Hydrologic factors
favorable to siting at the Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative are the
availability of unused. surface water, the current low level of groundwater
development in and near most of the suitable areas, the adequacy of present water
supplies at Nellis AFB, and the lack of projected hydrologic or water-quality
impacts which could be characterized as significant. Potentially moderate biologic
impacts at Ash Meadows may be associated with the low-level hydrologic impacts
projected in the ROI. Significant hydrologic impacts are possible at the Cannon
AFB alternative primarily from development of water supplies to meet construction
period requirements. The competition for water in the area, particularly among
agricultural users, is intense and the project could increase aquifer depletion and
cause local measurable water level declines in the adjacent wells. There is
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
considerable public coiucyern over the projected limited life of the Ogallala Aquifer
in the area. Project water requirements are very small in comparison to present
ROI usage for the Cannon AFB alternative.
Assuming limited mitigation measures, the Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF
alternative ranks first, the F. E. Warren AFB and Hawthorne AAP alternatives tie
for second, and the Cannon AFB alternative ranks last. However, the lease or
purchase of existing water rights is the most effective mitigation measure available
and would substantially reduce the impacts related to new water uses. The lease or
purchase of water rights is the most feasible at the F. E. Warren AFB and Cannon
AFB alternatives, because of the numerous sources of existing groundwater rights.
Mining and Fossil Fuels
Two types of impacts are likely to affect the mining and fossil fuels industries.
Direct impacts could result from siting an alternative on identified energy and/or
mineral resource, and would be greatest where these resources are in current
production. Direct impacts result from removing resources from development and
production for the life of the project (long term). Indirect impacts result from
competition for available labor, construction materials and equipment, power,
water, and community services. Indirect impacts would be more severe on the
mining industry than on oil and gas or geothermal extraction, and they would be
principally short term (during construction). The Cannon AFB alternative ranks first
because there are no mines or producing oil and gas fields in the immediate vicinity
of the base and suitable area. The Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative ranks
second.because the mining industry would experience moderate impacts. The F. E.
Warren AFB alternative ranks third due to direct impacts on the oil and gas
industry. The impacts could be decreased if CSB siting were to avoid producing
fields. The Hawthorne AAP alternative is last, due to the importance of the mining
industry to the entire region.
Socioeconomics
Socioeconomic resources include changes in employment, population, housing
and local government public finance. g
Socioeconomic impacts would be greatest in areas which currently have low
population, small labor forces available for project-related employment, and
relatively low fiscal capacity to support project-induced growth. Even within a
given area, impacts would differ from community to community, depending upon
their size and the level of in-migration experienced.
The Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative ranks first, having the least
potential for socioeconomic impacts. The large metropolitan area of Las Vegas
(Clark County) in the vicinity of potential project locations could readily supply
project needs and accommodate project-related population in-migration. The F. E.
Warren AFB alternative ranks second. Laramie County, which has a? moderate-
sized economy, would have higher population impacts due to this re-ion's low
unemployment level and the consequent need for labor in-migration. The Cannon
AFB alternative ranks third in terms of overall impacts on the socioeconomic
environment. Locating the system in Curry County, where the local labor supply is
small, would cause high county-level impacts. The Hawthorne AAP alternative
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
ranks fourth because the relative isolation of Mineral County from large population
centers and its own small population suggests large population and housing impacts
resulting from the project.
Land use includes agriculture and recreational uses. It is composed of four
attributes: 1) prime farmland, 2) agricultural land use types and production values,
3) wilderness, parks, and outdoor recreation lands, and 4) rural population.
Agricultural uses and rural populations could be displaced by the project. In
addition, wilderness, parks, and outdoor recreation could be indirectly impacted by
population migration into alternative project areas.
The fewest projcct impacts on prime armia.nd and agriculturPA type and
values would be expected in the Hawthorne AAP and Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF
alternatives, where the least arable land exists. Because of the comparatively low
level of project-induced population for the Hawthorne AAP alternative, it is ranked
first due to the wilderness, parks, and outdoor recreation attributes.
The number of people displaced will depend on exact project location. Based
on average density within the alternative suitable areas, it is estimated that 9
people could be displaced at the Hawthorne AAP alternative, 28 people at the
Cannon AFB alternative, 31 people at the Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF
alternative, and 62 people at the F. E. Warren AFB alternative.
Based upon the expected project effects, the Hawthorne AAP alternative is
ranked first with the Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative being a very close
second, followed by the Cannon AFB and F. E. Warren AFB alternatives. These
results apply to both long- and short-term effects.
The term "American Indians" is used to collectively refer to all the peoples
native to the North American continent, except Eskimos and Aleuts. American
Indian cutural resources include districts, sites, structures, biota, objects, and other
evidence of human use considered to be of cultural value and importance to
American Indians for traditional, religious, curatorial, or other reasons. These
resources may be prehistoric sites and artifacts, historic American Indian areas of
occupation and events and other related features. American Indian socioeconomic
resources are elements that ensure the economic well-being of Indian people,
particularly water and economic activities.
The F. E. Warren AFB and Cannon AFB alternatives are tied for first since
there are no American Indian reservations or colonies in proximity to either ROi.
The Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF ranks second. Although two Southern
Paiute reserves are located within the ROI, their primary areas of cultural and
economic use do not conflict with project-suitable areas. However, stress to
community infrastructure as a result of employment-induced in-migration could
cause significant impact on economic resources.
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
Hawthorne AAP alternative ranks third. The proposed project would severely
impact cultural and economic resources of the Walker River Indian Reservation.
This impact would extend outside the ROI to reservations which have kinship ties to
the Walker River Tribe and also currently use areas in and adjacent to. the suitable
area.
Cultural resources are considored to b? of scientific, traditicta., religious, or
other importance to a culture, subculture, or community, and include districts,
networks, structures, buildings, sites, objects, and other evidence of human use.
These resources may be prehistoric or historic and may be archaeological,
architectural, or archival in nature.
Significant direct and indirect impacts are expected on cultural resources. In
general, significant direct impacts are less likely where resource density is lower
and potential for mitigation exists. Significant indirect impacts are most likely with
greater resource density and accessibility to the general public, higher levels of
project-induced population growth and development, ..and lower potential for
mitigation of the impacts.
The Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative ranks first primarily because of
low indirect impacts. The heritage value (the tangible value people place on
cultural resources because of personal reasons) of some resources at this alternative
may make mitigation more difficult.
The F. E. Warren AFB and Cannon AFB alternatives are tied for second.
Although significant impacts are predicted at all alternatives, the levels of impact
are higher than at the Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative.
The Hawthorne AAP alternative ranks last. Although in most respects this
alternative is the same as the Nellis AFB/Indian Springs AAF alternative, the high
relative population growth indicates a high level of indirect impact. Also,
mitigation of heritage values is more difficult.
The level of projected impacts is summarized in Figure 3. To aid the
comparative evaluation of alternatives, the figure identifies four levels of impact:
negligible impact, low impact, moderate impact, and high impact. This presentation
provides a rough visual ranking within each resource category. Level of impacts
should be compared within resource categories but not across resource categories.
Short-term impacts (construction phase) are more intense than long-term
(operations phase) impacts for all resources in all alternatives, except cultural
resources for the Hawthorne AAP alternative where indirect impacts are of greatest
concern throughout the project life.
No high impacts are anticipated at the F. E. Warren AFB alternative.
Moderate impacts are anticipated on several resources.
For the Cannon AFB alternative, impacts on socioeconomics and
transportation, are anticipated to be high. The large construction population in-
Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914R001000110035-5
 Approved For Release 2009/08/17: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01000110035-5
RESOURCE:
z
J
N
z
.
W
Z a
0
I
Q N
ti
--
Q
Q p"
N
QQ
} !
a i
Q
-
~~
o
!
2
.
W
0:
~.
-A
I
00
?j1
-4
0
W a
a
Z
2
~++
I
2 v~ (
i
p
h- G
ALT_RNAT1YES
j
ea
!
Z
fi>- a
l` al
ll
a
'L
Q
.- u,
I a
~-
w
3
1 J
n
a
i c~
1. F.E. -WARREN AFB
?
?
( ?
o
?.
?
? j f
2. CANNON AFB
?
! ?
o
?
! ?
? 193
3. MELLIS AFB'
J
I
INOIAN SPRINGS AAF
HAWTHORNE AAP
4
i ?
1
6,
?
?
?
!
?
.