PACAF aims for end of Aug. for revised EIS

The U.S. Air Force’s plans for a “hybrid” use of both the Saipan and Tinian airports will be detailed in a revised environmental impact statement targeted for release by the end of August, Pacific Air Forces officials said Saturday.

Air Force officials held an open house at the Pedro P. Tenorio Multi-Purpose Center on Saturday, explaining their divert options on either Tinian, Saipan, or both islands, and its potential impacts on historical sites.

The hybrid approach was first “socialized” among government leaders and military leaders earlier this year. It was announced months after the Commonwealth Ports Authority rejected a project siting on Saipan, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s rating of earlier impact documents as “insufficient” due to its minimal assessment of severe noise impacts on Saipan residents.

“We modified our proposal and this is the proposal we brought back to the CNMI for your comments,” said U.S. Air Force Col. Michael Addison. “This proposal removes all the fighter aircraft [and] all the associated construction involved with it.”

When asked to comment on the CPA board resolution, Addison said CPA would be involved in the process. “We are working in partnership with CPA as well as all other consulting parties…Our goal here is to get to an end-state that is mutually agreeable to everybody.”

The U.S. military would need to acquire from CPA leased lands on Saipan for a divert project. CPA also has final say over an airport laydown plan to be sent to the Federal Aviation Administration for approval should any divert project be agreed to.

Pacific Air Forces Chief of Basing and Bed Downs Carol Gaudette told Saipan Tribune that with the revised EIS they expect “noise contour levels would shrink considerably” as they did not have plans for fighter activity.

The Air Force would instead fly tanker aircraft.

There will also be no “preferred” alternative within this revised EIS.

She said the revised project excluded the fighter aircraft, an extension of the Tinian airport runway, a munitions igloo or storage area, and parking apron on Saipan. The Tinian runway extension would have required Broadway to be rerouted, she said.

For Tinian, the Air Force has siting options on the north side and south side of the airport.

It was also clarified that the U.S. military had not made a decision yet to consolidate on the northern end of the Tinian airport as was reported by those involved in the “CNMI Joint Military Project” earlier this year. The Marine Forces Pacific under the Department of Navy heads the CJMT project.

If the north siting option were used, it is likely the Air Force would not operate at the same time with the CJMT operations because of this. They would plan for “deconflicting” schedules. In comparison, the CJMT project uses rotary-winged aircraft versus the fixed-wing aircraft of the Air Force.

The U.S. military would have to construct one on the north end if activity is placed on the north end.

The modified Saipan alternative includes a parking apron, hydrant system, bulk fuel storage, maintenance facility, and cargo pad.

Gaudette said the required leased lands for operations would be less than reported 33 acres needed earlier. An exact acreage could not be obtained as of press time.

The modified Tinian alternative includes for both north and south siting options, construction of taxiways, a cargo pad, parking apron, maintenance facility, fire pump building, tanks, and wells, operational fuel tanks, and bulk fuel storage.

The hybrid option entails construction of a bulk fuel storage, maintenance facility, cargo pad on Saipan, plus construction entailed in the modified Tinian alternative.

Historic impact

Air Force officials could not say exactly what impacts there would be on historic sites, explaining that that’s why they were doing the public commenting period—to find out.

They aim for a “Sec. 106” agreement under the National Historical Preservation Act by December. It is the US Air Force policy to have one signed among local and federal agencies before a final environmental impact statement is released.

Gaudette said the Sec. 106 agreement provides the “framework for determine how a project addresses historic properties and resources during construction and implementation of” their project.

“There is certainly history here of Chamorro and Carolinian people of the CNMI but a lot of the history here is Air Force history too. So your history is our history, so we feel we have a vested interest in doing this the right way,” Addison said.

An “area of potential effect” is decided by determining all the areas where the Air Force anticipates the proposed undertaking might change the character or use of historic properties, if they exist. They include direct and indirect effects, such as construction, noise and vehicle traffic.

For the modified Saipan Alternative, the APE includes construction areas at the airport and proposed traffic routes [roads] between the airport and seaport. The APE extends east and west beyond construction areas at the airport to account for noise produced by aircraft during takeoff and landing. Saipan International Airport is completely contained within the boundaries of the Isley Historic District portion of the Landing Beaches, Aslito/Isley Field, and Marpi Point National Historic Landmark. The Air Force considers an effect on any part of the NHL to be an effect on the entire NHL.

The modified Tinian Alternative APE includes construction areas at the airport and seaport, and proposed traffic routes. The APE extends east and west beyond construction areas at the airport to account for noise produced by aircraft during takeoff and landing.

The Hybrid Modified APE is a combination of both the Modified Saipan and Tinian APEs. Although construction on each island would be less than the original alternatives, the APEs are the same due to the NHL on Saipan and the aircraft noise contours on Saipan and Tinian.

When asked to comment on the open house meeting, CNMI State Historic Preservation officer Mertie Kani called it “very good.” When asked if they had started discussions on a programmatic agreement, CNMI Historic Preservation Review Board vice chair Hiro Kurashina said “not yet” as he was leaving the Multi-Purpose Center.