From: | CPEO Moderator <cpeo@cpeo.org> |
Date: | 7 Aug 2003 14:25:38 -0000 |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | [CPEO-MEF] Navy's claim isn't credible |
North Carolina THE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER EDITORIAL Navy's claim isn't credible `Years of meticulous research'? Evidence belies admiral's comment Philip and Marilyn Lange Wed, Aug. 06, 2003 Admiral Robert Natter's reply to a Charlotte Observer editorial, branding as "stupid" his selection of Washington County for an outlying landing field (OLF), was quite a piece of work. For starters, his claim that the Navy's Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for siting the new landing field is the culmination of "three years of meticulous research" doesn't quite hold up. Even if Admiral Natter starts his count at the end of October 2000, when he first announced his search for a new OLF "precisely because of community concerns over jet noise," as he put it then, three years is rather a stretch. Meticulous? Judge for yourself. The FEIS tells us the Navy began to solicit information from local government leaders at 17 potential sites in April 2001. It is noteworthy that "[the site reconnaissance] surveys were limited to aerial overflights and windshield observations along existing roads which traverse the sites." They then narrowed the "candidate sites" to seven and gave public notification in January 2002. Navy contractors had barely six months for in-depth study of the seven sites before the release of the Draft EIS in July that year. This hardly qualifies as "meticulous" research over three years. The FEIS information on the hazards of bird-aircraft collisions is also puzzling. The Navy's experts disagreed with years of field observation by local naturalists. They also took issue with the Air Force research data that led to the creation of the bird-aircraft strike hazard program. Even though Air Force bird avoidance model (BAM) expert Jeffrey Short, who developed the bird-strike program, offered his expertise to the Navy, there is nothing in the FEIS that indicates his input was sought. Why? Perhaps because, Short's unquestionable credentials aside, it would be unlikely that his input would support the Washington County Site. This editorial can be viewed at: http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/6467680.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ CPEO: A DECADE OF SUCCESS. Your generous support will ensure that our important work on military and environmental issues will continue. Please consider one of our donation options. Thank you. http://www.groundspring.org/donate/index.cfm?ID=2086-0|721-0 |
Follow-Ups
|
Prev by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Minuteman III Shot from Vandenburg to Kwajalein, Marshalls Next by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Lawmakers back 25-year lease extension | |
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] Minuteman III Shot from Vandenburg to Kwajalein, Marshalls Next by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] need pink water video |