USEPA comments on the Final EIS

USEPA comments on the Final EIS

by Michele Catahay from KUAM. com

Guam - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recognizes that some concerns noted in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement have been addressed in the Final EIS. Despite improvements to the document, more work needs to be done to ensure environmental concerns are properly addressed.

It was several months ago when the US Environmental Protection Agency had said the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the U.S. Marines' relocation was "environmentally unsatisfactory". Now after the release of the Final EIS and talks with the Department of Defense on these issues, USEPA's Jared Blumenfeld says based on his review there are still major concerns that need to be addressed.

He says if mitigation efforts promised in the EIS are successfully implemented, the project will avoid negative impacts to health and environment. USEPA says in order for the implementation to be successful, DOD must commit to three major mitigation measures: (1) seek funding for drinking water and wastewater system infrastructure; (2) manage construction and the arrival of military personnel to not cause significant environmental impacts or existing infrastructure limitations through adaptive program management; and (3) undertake an additional assessment of coral at Apra Harbor.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy who manages environmental programs Donald Schregardus is currently on island and he says he will work closely with agencies to ensure these issues are addressed. "I'm pleased. We've put a lot of effort. We've worked with EPA and NOAA and the Department of the Interior on improving the document, so I'm glad they've recognized that. We, especially with the Department of Navy, remain committed to meeting our requirements, investing in the sewer and water system, the road systems and meeting the cultural concerns on the island, as well," he said.

To date, no funding has been secured to upgrade to the drinking water and wastewater system improvements, USEPA says DOD needs to commit to seeking much needed funding and come up with a plan to pursue an additional $700 million for upgrades. Upgrades are needed for upgrades to the North District and Hagatna Wastewater Treatment Plant.

"We recognized that there are significant challenges with infrastructure on the island. We're committed to ensuring that the Department of Defense makes its commitments, but does everything in its power to help Guam and the federal government makes its commitment on infrastructure and other needs here on the island of Guam," Shregardus added.

The EPA also says the record of decision should clarify who decision makers are, whom the Environmental Council is advising and the process for making decisions when it comes to these impacts. When it comes to emissions, EPA says the Department of Defense must commit to analyzing diesel before construction activities are underway. It is expected that the buildup will increase emissions in a medically underserved community.

The EPA also recommends for DOD to commit to coordination with the Guam Power Authority. With these issues outlined as part of comments submitted from the USEPA, the federal agency says it will continue working with DOD, the Government of Guam and other federal agencies to ensure the environmental acceptability of the project.

Guam EPA Under Scrutiny

GEPA under scrutiny .
Thursday, 06 May 2010 05:05
by Therese Hart
Marianas Variety News Staff

EPA official says environment agency facing high-risk status

REPRESENTATIVES from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are currently on island to look into the Guam EPA’s financial control system, which a report found to be mismanaged.

Enrique Manzanilla, director of EPA’s communities and ecosystems division, earlier told Guam EPA administrator Lorilee Crisostomo that the fiscal mismanagement could place the agency under a high-risk status.

EPA’s 2009 End of Year Program Review Summary found that in the last two years, Guam EPA has been hiring staff without increasing its revenues.

Gerry Cruz, public information officer for GEPA, said yesterday that Crisostomo was off-island and she would have to review the report thoroughly before she could comment.

An administration officer in Adelup, who requested not to be identified, said Crisostomo is likely to be placed on administrative leave once she gets back from her trip.

Manzanilla stated in his letter to the Guam EPA administrator that his staff has discussed the agency’s financial difficulties with Crisostomo over the last two years.

Cruz said EPA officials are working with Guam EPA and discussing all the points made in the report.

Cruz said the problems that GEPA is facing “didn’t just happen overnight.” He said there were some good points EPA mentioned about the progress GEPA is making in spite of its financial woes.

In discussions with Crisostomo, the administrative services office and other Guam EPA managers, EPA stated it was unclear how the local agency prioritizes its work, controls its finances or even whether it can determine if it is able to meet its salary and other operational expenses for the rest of the fiscal year.

The EPA report concluded that Guam EPA has not taken any steps to prevent the cash flow deficit from happening at the beginning of fiscal year 2011.

As an indicator of the difficulty GEPA will have meeting its expenses this year, Guam EPA’s salary expenses alone will total over $3 million. Local mandates require Guam EPA staff salaries to be paid exclusively by the EPA grant.

USEPA’s total consolidated grant for the year is $3.2 million, which is extended to cover salary plus other operational expenses. Because the EPA grant is encumbered for special purposes, less than $3 million of the grant is actually available for GEPA salaries.

“It is unlikely that current EPA funding would cover existing GEPA salaries, let alone contractors, project implementation, other operational expenses, unanticipated expenses, or higher-than-anticipated costs. This is a problem for an agency that is mostly funded by EPA’s grant,” Manzanilla stated in his letter to Crisostomo.

“Clearly there is a pattern of behavior that hardly helps its financial difficulties. The pattern over the last few years has been a ‘boom or bust’ system: funds have been frozen during the beginning of year cash flow “deficit” crisis GEPA experiences. Then an ad hoc hiring and other spending decisions are made after receiving EPA’s first grant award in spring, followed by spending cuts on an as-needed basis as the fiscal year closes,” the EPA report stated.

“This process has contributed to the financial problems described…and it is a fundamental deficiency,” according to the report.

##

Cruz: Extend time for buildup study's review

Cruz: Extend time for buildup study's review

By Dionesis Tamondong • Pacific Daily News • October 8, 2009

Vice Speaker Benjamin Cruz has asked the Joint Guam Program Office to extend the review period of the draft Environmental Impact Statement.

In a letter to Maj. Gen. David Bice, executive director of the office coordinating the military buildup on Guam, Cruz said more time will be needed for the Legislature and the public to go over the study's 10,000 pages and to properly respond.

Cruz, in his letter, said keeping the review and comment period to 45 days would be "a disservice to the people of Guam."

The detailed study, which looks at the potential consequences the planned military projects will have on the island's environment, is set to be published Nov. 20 on the Federal Register.

Cruz noted the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is allowing 60 days for people to comment on a proposed offshore disposal of dredged material from Apra Harbor.

"Surely, the sheer volume of the buildup (draft Environmental Impact Statement) and the complexity of issues it covers warrants a comment period longer than 45 days," his letter stated.