The U.S. Department of Navy conceded on Friday to public and agency concerns over high-magnitude and large-scale training and bombing on Tinian and Pagan, ordering a second round of review of impacts to these two CNMI islands. The Navy disclosed that further analysis is \u201cneeded.\u201d<\/p>\n
Federal and local government agencies believe the Navy has erroneously and underwhelmingly declared their impacts to be \u201cless than significant.\u201d<\/p>\n
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, for one, has withheld rating the Navy\u2019s impact documents until further review is completed.<\/p>\n
Craig Whelden, executive director of the Marine Corps Forces Pacific\u2014operating under the Department of Navy\u2014disclosed the news in a phone call to Gov. Eloy Inos around 9:30 Friday morning.<\/p>\n
Whelden separately disclosed the news to Saipan Tribune in an email the same morning.<\/p>\n
Administration officials heavily involved with coordinating a response to the military\u2019s live-fire plan took the news as a win for the CNMI and a win for the National Environmental Policy Act, which mandates the impact review.<\/p>\n
Whelden was pressed on Thursday for his thoughts on the CNMI\u2019s request that the Navy furnish a second draft environmental impact statement for its live-fire project.<\/p>\n
The Navy\u2019s announcement of \u201csupplemental\u201d EIS came on top of the close of the formal comment period for the Navy\u2019s first draft.<\/p>\n
Whelden told Saipan Tribune that the supplemental EIS is expected to be finished in the spring of 2016. Its \u201cfull scope\u201d would not be known until they review and consider all public and agency comments received up to Friday, Whelden said.<\/p>\n
\u201cAs a result of the information we\u2019ve received to date, we\u2019ve identified a need to conduct additional analysis of potential impacts to the groundwater aquifer on Tinian and coral on Tinian and Pagan, including associated mitigation,\u201d Whelden said in the email.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019ve received many comments in the past six months and will be assessing them in the weeks to come\u2026 [When the EIS is completed] we will notify the CNMI, and the public will have an opportunity to review and comment during a review period.\u00a0 We appreciate all the public input to date and it will all be considered in preparing the final EIS,\u201d Whelden said.<\/p>\n
In total, the CNMI has responded to the Navy\u2019s plans with well over a thousand pages of official comment, administration officials have said.<\/p>\n
Inos, in his comments, said the CNMI has provided two-thirds of Tinian to the U.S. military, and the entire island of Farallon de Medinilla for training purposes.<\/p>\n
He said CNMI citizens volunteer to serve in the Armed Forces at rates far exceeding the national average, and that the community has worked hard to collaborate with the Department of Defense.<\/p>\n
\u201cUnfortunately, the [CNMI live-fire project] threatens to compromise that partnership,\u201d Inos writes. \u201cThe Navy has proposed to take the entire of island of Pagan for large-scale, live-fire training (including artillery, aerial, and ship-to-shore bombardment) and to radically and unilaterally alter the previously-agreed activities carried out on the military use portion of the island of Tinian.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cAs proposed, these actions represent an existential threat to our tourism-driven economy, our fragile ecosystem, our cultural resources and, indeed, our way of life,\u201d Inos said. \u201cI must respectfully insist that the Navy withdraw and reconsider its proposal.\u201d<\/p>\n
Rep. Angel Demapan (R-Saipan), chairman of the House Committee on Foreign and Federal Relations, said the Defense Department\u2019s admission on Friday is a \u201cvictory for the people of the Commonwealth.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cFor many months, an overwhelming majority of our people have stood together with a strong objection to the proposals by the DoD to conduct live-fire training in our islands because we have legitimate concerns about the dangers posed to our natural resources and our way of life in these fragile island communities,\u201d Demapan said. \u201cWe never objected to patriotism nor do we object to our armed forces. We simply believed that other alternatives needed to be considered in order to strike a balance between national security and the economic welfare of the people who proudly call the Marianas home.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThis latest development is a positive indication that resiliency can defeat relentlessness,\u201d Demapan said.<\/p>\n
EPA: Further review<\/strong><\/p>\n The EPA, in their comment letter, tells Whelden that a number of substantial issues warrant further review and analysis, and consideration of additional alternatives.<\/p>\n \u201c\u2026We fully support the [Navy\u2019s] recent decision to prepare a supplemental draft EIS to address\u201d concerns the Navy has received, wrote EPA enforcement division director Kathleen H. Johnson in the EPA cover letter. \u201cEPA will defer issuing a rating until the [supplemental EIS] is circulated.\u201d<\/p>\n The EPA letter was dated Sep. 29, some three days before the Navy announced its decision publicly.<\/p>\n The Navy has not discussed the \u201cvulnerability\u201d of the Tinian aquifer to contamination, according to EPA.<\/p>\n \u201cThe analysis does not appear to fully consider the highly permeable Marianas limestone, which underlies most of the project area [on Tinian] and creates high susceptibility to contamination. The DEIS notes that the limestone is porous, allowing water to readily flow through it, and that rainfall percolates rapidly downward into such rock; however, no discussion of the solubility of munitions constituents is included, nor are any protections identified to prevent pollutants from infiltrating the soil and entering the aquifer,\u201d the EPA states.<\/p>\n The EPA wants that the Navy to discuss the solubility of various munitions constituents and other potential pollutants that the proposed action would introduce to surface soils, and the estimated time it would take for these pollutants to reach groundwater. For example, perchlorate, a munitions chemical, from propellant in rocket fuels should be discussed \u201cas it is very soluble and exhibits little to no soil absorption,\u201d the EPA states.<\/p>\n On the impact to corals, the Navy plans to permanently remove 10.3 acres of coral on Tinian to construct land ramps for assault vehicles will result in high-magnitude, severe impacts to coral reefs and marine habitat, says EPA. That 10.3 acres would include another 10.3 acres for indirect impacts.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Navy does not adequately evaluate a full range of alternatives and demonstrate that the ramp at Unai Chulu is the Least Environmental Damaging Practicable Alternative\u201d as required by the Clean Water Act, Johnson said. \u201cIt does not identify appropriate mitigation to offset the project impacts nor whether the Navy could mitigate the impacts in accordance\u201d with this federal law, Johnson adds. The EPA believes this failure to adequately offset significant project impacts is \u201cgrounds for denial\u201d of Clean Water Act permit application.<\/p>\n Consultant: Lack of context<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cThe total land mass of the CNMI is about 175 of the size of Rhode Island,\u201d writes Jim Keany, ESA biological resources director, in their memo to Inos detailing their comments on the live-fire project. ESA is a consultant to Inos on the live-fire project.<\/p>\n \u201cThe [Navy] does not acknowledge the special context of island ecology and lacks science-based analysis,\u201d Keany said. \u201cThe EIS consistently uses acres of habitat loss as an index of magnitude of effects to habitat and wildlife. While loss of 100 acres of habitat would have relatively minor effects to common wildlife [in] the mainland U.S., loss of the same area of habitat on a small island that supports endemic and rare species has vastly different consequences,\u201d Keany said.<\/p>\n The draft EIS also neglects environmental justice.<\/p>\n \u201cThe CJMT EIS analysis acknowledges that the entire population of the CNMI is minority and low income, yet makes the astounding conclusion that there would be no disproportionate impact to those populations because all would be impacted equally,\u201d Keany said. \u201cThis is analogous to determining that it was fair to place a toxic incinerator in a low-income minority because all those in the town would be similarly affected\u2014as opposed to placing it somewhere else.\u201d<\/p>\n There are two executive orders relevant to the NEPA compliance process and to the CJMT project.<\/p>\n Executive order 12898 directs all federal agencies to address adverse human health effects from its program on minority and low-income communities.<\/p>\n Executive order 13045 requires federal agencies to assess environmental health risks and safety risks that would disproportionately impact children.<\/p>\n Government consultants believe the Navy has failed the spirit and letter of both orders.<\/p>\n Another training location<\/strong><\/p>\n While the Navy has essentially ordered another year of environmental impact review, its decision to continue with their plans despite thousands of pages of comments balking at the military\u2019s proposal has some officials concerned that the Navy is entrenched for the long haul. If the Navy were to continue with their project, they would have to provide a basic requirement of federal law\u2014an adequate analysis of \u201calternatives,\u201d according to Dentons LLC, a firm hired to review the live-fire project.<\/p>\n Dentons argues that U.S. courts have repeatedly ruled that if an agency fails to consider viable or reasonable alternatives, an EIS is inadequate.<\/p>\n \u201c\u2026Our battle is not over,\u201d Demapan told Saipan Tribune.<\/p>\n \u201cDespite our community\u2019s strong stance to preserve and protect our pristine island environment, and despite the DoD\u2019s admission of error, it is still troubling that they have decided to still make an attempt at a supplemental environmental impact study,\u201d Demapan said. \u201cThey should invest their time and energy in considering a better alternative in a place where they will not diminish important natural resources and in a place where they will not drastically alter the economic landscape of the community.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cAn alternative analysis is not merely a matter of paperwork,\u201d wrote Dentons lawyers Nicholas Yost, Matthew Adams, and Jessica Duggan. \u201cOr an exercise in justifying pre-existing agency preferences.\u201d<\/p>\n According to Dentons, the Navy has failed to evaluate training in the following areas:<\/p>\n In Japan and Korea, where U.S. forces currently and can and do use training ranges in both countries<\/p>\n In Australia, where U.S. forces regularly train, and where the two countries have agreed to extend long-term their training arrangements.<\/p>\n In the Philippines, where U.S. has trained for years, and have conducted large-scale amphibious exercises in island environments.<\/p>\n In Hawaii, where there exists already multiple testing and training ranges.<\/p>\n In Chuuk or Palau, where the Navy has reportedly suggested it could move the training if the CNMI does not approve a land use agreement allowing military training on Pagan. \u201cPresumably it would not have made this suggestion if Chuuk or Palau were not reasonable alternatives,\u201d Dentons said.<\/p>\n Dentons says these \u201clegal deficiencies,\u201d among others, must be corrected. If not, the Navy will \u201cnot have a legally-adequate basis for reaching a decision on the CJMT\u201d live-project.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The U.S. Department of Navy conceded on Friday to public and agency concerns over high-magnitude…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":47,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[94],"tags":[26,1503,200,2307],"class_list":["post-211756","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-headlines","tag-cnmi","tag-eis","tag-military","tag-nepa"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211756","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/47"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=211756"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211756\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=211756"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=211756"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=211756"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}