Scrapped wharf plan cost Port $1.5 million
By Steve Limtiaco • Pacific Daily News • February 9, 2010
A $1.5 million plan to help the Port Authority of Guam create a new "deep water" wharf in outer Apra Harbor has gone to waste because the wharf project was scrapped.
According to a fiscal 2009 financial audit, released yesterday by the Office of Public Accountability and prepared by Ernst & Young, the cost of the wharf plan was recorded as a loss because the project won't be implemented.
The port remains open to the idea of the wharf project, according to Port General Manager Glenn Leon Guerrero, but it was estimated to cost as much as $83 million to complete and port officials decided to spend money on other improvements instead. There were also environmental concerns related to the wharf project, he said yesterday.
"As we were evaluating the need for this project, we learned of the impending military buildup, which then forced the port to redirect our energies to ensuring the necessary upgrades were implemented to our terminal facility to meet the demands of our community and the military buildup," he said.
The port will make improvements according to its modernization plan, but a deep water wharf is not part of the plan, Leon Guerrero said.
Pre-buildup
The idea of creating a new wharf and storage space on more than 17 acres of dredged soil was explored before the military buildup was announced, as a way to allow more aircraft carriers and other large vessels to visit Guam.
In September 2002, the government of Guam received a $1.5 million grant award from the Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, to prepare an architectural and engineering design, and an environmental impact statement for a new deep wharf in outer Apra Harbor, according to Pacific Daily News files.
The federal share of the wharf design and environmental study was $1.3 million, and the port's share was $200,000, which came from port revenue, Leon Guerrero said. The wharf plan was done by TG Engineers, the same company that designed the new landfill, and the environmental study was done by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Military wharf
The military's preferred plan for visiting aircraft carriers, according to the draft Environmental Impact Statement for the buildup, is to create a new carrier wharf at inner Apra Harbor. The military's proposal would require widening an existing shipping channel and dredging the seabed to create a turning basin near the wharf.
The audit report released yesterday states the port currently is waiting for $99.7 million in federal grants and loans so it can start working on the $200 million in planned improvements that are part of the modernization plan.
According to the audit, the port collected about the same amount of revenue during fiscal 2009 as it did during fiscal 2008 -- $30.1 million in fiscal 2009, compared to $30.18 million the previous fiscal year.
The audit notes the port collected about $636,000 less in cargo handling and wharfage fees, but collected about $897,000 more for equipment and space rental.
The port also cut its operating expenses by $378,000 last fiscal year, the report states.
Showing posts with label Wharf. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wharf. Show all posts
Friday, February 12, 2010
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
Guam governor asks U.S. to delay military buildup
Guam governor asks U.S. to delay military buildup
By Teri Weaver , Stars and Stripes
Online edition, Friday, January 29, 2010
TOKYO — Guam’s governor on Thursday asked the U.S. military to delay its plans to move more than 9,000 troops to the island.
In a subsequent news release on Friday, Gov. Felix Camacho said he thought extending the construction timeline would lessen the overall impact on the island. He did not offer specifics, other than to say the buildup should extend beyond 2014.
“There is support of the relocation of U.S. Marines from Okinawa to Guam and overall support for the U.S. armed services,” Camacho wrote to Navy Secretary Ray Mabus in a letter dated Jan. 28.
“However, we must not overlook the reality that we have a fragile territorial economy, possess a limited amount of financial resources and lack the capacity to absorb the impacts of 20 years worth of growth in a five-year time frame.”
The request is not meant to signal an overall decrease in Camacho’s support for the project, according to the governor’s spokeswoman Charlene Calip.
Through a spokeswoman, Navy Undersecretary Robert Work said late Friday the Navy had received the letter and was working on a prompt response.
“The Department appreciates the Governor’s comments and will continue to work closely with Guam’s and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands’ elected leaders in the planning and execution of the military realignment,” Work said in a written statement.
But Camacho's request does come as more residents and local leaders have expressed concerns about the buildup in public meetings in recent weeks.
Mabus was traveling in the Pacific and could not be immediately reached for comment, according to Lt. Laura Stegherr, a Navy spokeswoman.
The buildup calls for adding nearly 80,000 people to Guam’s 178,000 population during the height of construction in 2014. Plans include permanently moving 8,600 Marines from Okinawa to Guam, adding an Army air defense unit, and building a wharf that can support three-week visits by aircraft carriers, which typically carry a crew of 5,000.
In recent weeks, the military, Guam’s legislature and Camacho have all held hearings on the project as part of a federally required environmental review. Some of those meetings have turned into platforms for sharp criticism of the buildup, with residents and local leaders questioning the military’s proposal to use land outside its current footprint.
Rep. Madeleine Bordallo, the island’s non-voting congressional representative who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, was to fly back to the island to hold five more hearings on Saturday and Sunday.
By Teri Weaver , Stars and Stripes
Online edition, Friday, January 29, 2010
TOKYO — Guam’s governor on Thursday asked the U.S. military to delay its plans to move more than 9,000 troops to the island.
In a subsequent news release on Friday, Gov. Felix Camacho said he thought extending the construction timeline would lessen the overall impact on the island. He did not offer specifics, other than to say the buildup should extend beyond 2014.
“There is support of the relocation of U.S. Marines from Okinawa to Guam and overall support for the U.S. armed services,” Camacho wrote to Navy Secretary Ray Mabus in a letter dated Jan. 28.
“However, we must not overlook the reality that we have a fragile territorial economy, possess a limited amount of financial resources and lack the capacity to absorb the impacts of 20 years worth of growth in a five-year time frame.”
The request is not meant to signal an overall decrease in Camacho’s support for the project, according to the governor’s spokeswoman Charlene Calip.
Through a spokeswoman, Navy Undersecretary Robert Work said late Friday the Navy had received the letter and was working on a prompt response.
“The Department appreciates the Governor’s comments and will continue to work closely with Guam’s and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands’ elected leaders in the planning and execution of the military realignment,” Work said in a written statement.
But Camacho's request does come as more residents and local leaders have expressed concerns about the buildup in public meetings in recent weeks.
Mabus was traveling in the Pacific and could not be immediately reached for comment, according to Lt. Laura Stegherr, a Navy spokeswoman.
The buildup calls for adding nearly 80,000 people to Guam’s 178,000 population during the height of construction in 2014. Plans include permanently moving 8,600 Marines from Okinawa to Guam, adding an Army air defense unit, and building a wharf that can support three-week visits by aircraft carriers, which typically carry a crew of 5,000.
In recent weeks, the military, Guam’s legislature and Camacho have all held hearings on the project as part of a federally required environmental review. Some of those meetings have turned into platforms for sharp criticism of the buildup, with residents and local leaders questioning the military’s proposal to use land outside its current footprint.
Rep. Madeleine Bordallo, the island’s non-voting congressional representative who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, was to fly back to the island to hold five more hearings on Saturday and Sunday.
Thursday, January 07, 2010
First buildup hearing held in South
First buildup hearing held in South
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 12:10 AM
by Nick Delgado
GUAM - The first public hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement was held Thursday evening at Southern High School in Santa Rita. Approximately 319 island residents participated, some to listen to proposed plans, while others provided comment on the marine relocation from Okinawa to Guam.
Joint Guam Program Office Chief of Staff colonel Paul Pohn presented the military's proposed actions for the buildup. Those proposals include developing and constructing facilities and infrastructure to support approximately 8,600 marines and their 9,000 dependents, a new deep-draft wharf and turning basin along with shore side infrastructure improvements to be constructed at Apra Harbor to support U.S. Navy transient nuclear aircraft carriers, and finally develop facilities and infrastructure to support relocating 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an army air and missile defense task force.
Residents were informed that the hearing would only allow for them to submit comments, and not debate their concerns with military officials. While the population increase is dependent upon the funding available to begin the buildup, Pohn says the military's goal is to use as much DOD land as possible, as he says it's still too soon to determine what land is needed at this time.
Al San Agustin with the Chamoru tribe expressed how the military buildup would not be a good thing for the people of Guam, as it will negatively impact the future generations. Tribal chairman Frank Schacher says he has been carefully studying the draft EIS Schacher claims there is not one bit of information that shares the impacts of the Chamorro people. He adds that the DEIS consists more of the questions that the military wants answered rather than what the people of Guam want.
Chamber of Commerce President David Leddy meanwhile expressed why the island needs the military's presence to help better Guam's economy.
Concerned resident Kenneth Leon guerrero shared his frustration with the lack of public safety information in the DEIS. Leon Guerrero questioned the lack of statistics that show the crime rate that the marines have committed off base in Okinawa, and how the military plans to mitigate the issue on Guam.
While local veteran Tom Barcinas stated that Guam and America need each other, he also said it is very sad to think that the Chamorro people will become the minority. Barcinas says the impact will compromise the island's culture, value, and language, which he says is a very high price to pay.
Resident Angel Santos questioned why Guam is the only place being selected over the other areas in the region. He fears that Guam will be more of an easy target with the increase in military.
Former Chamoru nations maga'haga Trini Torres says that it is not a done deal as she is determined to continue the fight to prevent the marine relocation. Torres expressed major frustration encouraging others to do the same.
Piti Mayor Ben Gumataotao however stated that the military is not coming to bring war to the island, but to help the economy and defend the island for everyone living on it.
Residents were also given a summary explanation of the DEIS. At each station during the open house period. JGPO officials say all comments will now be included in volume 10 of the DEIS.
Residents have another opportunity to provide oral comment this Saturday at the University of Guam Field House in Mangilao. The public also has until February 17th to comment on the DEIS by logging onto www.guambuildupeis.us
Posted: Jan 08, 2010 12:10 AM
by Nick Delgado
GUAM - The first public hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement was held Thursday evening at Southern High School in Santa Rita. Approximately 319 island residents participated, some to listen to proposed plans, while others provided comment on the marine relocation from Okinawa to Guam.
Joint Guam Program Office Chief of Staff colonel Paul Pohn presented the military's proposed actions for the buildup. Those proposals include developing and constructing facilities and infrastructure to support approximately 8,600 marines and their 9,000 dependents, a new deep-draft wharf and turning basin along with shore side infrastructure improvements to be constructed at Apra Harbor to support U.S. Navy transient nuclear aircraft carriers, and finally develop facilities and infrastructure to support relocating 600 military personnel and their 900 dependents to establish and operate an army air and missile defense task force.
Residents were informed that the hearing would only allow for them to submit comments, and not debate their concerns with military officials. While the population increase is dependent upon the funding available to begin the buildup, Pohn says the military's goal is to use as much DOD land as possible, as he says it's still too soon to determine what land is needed at this time.
Al San Agustin with the Chamoru tribe expressed how the military buildup would not be a good thing for the people of Guam, as it will negatively impact the future generations. Tribal chairman Frank Schacher says he has been carefully studying the draft EIS Schacher claims there is not one bit of information that shares the impacts of the Chamorro people. He adds that the DEIS consists more of the questions that the military wants answered rather than what the people of Guam want.
Chamber of Commerce President David Leddy meanwhile expressed why the island needs the military's presence to help better Guam's economy.
Concerned resident Kenneth Leon guerrero shared his frustration with the lack of public safety information in the DEIS. Leon Guerrero questioned the lack of statistics that show the crime rate that the marines have committed off base in Okinawa, and how the military plans to mitigate the issue on Guam.
While local veteran Tom Barcinas stated that Guam and America need each other, he also said it is very sad to think that the Chamorro people will become the minority. Barcinas says the impact will compromise the island's culture, value, and language, which he says is a very high price to pay.
Resident Angel Santos questioned why Guam is the only place being selected over the other areas in the region. He fears that Guam will be more of an easy target with the increase in military.
Former Chamoru nations maga'haga Trini Torres says that it is not a done deal as she is determined to continue the fight to prevent the marine relocation. Torres expressed major frustration encouraging others to do the same.
Piti Mayor Ben Gumataotao however stated that the military is not coming to bring war to the island, but to help the economy and defend the island for everyone living on it.
Residents were also given a summary explanation of the DEIS. At each station during the open house period. JGPO officials say all comments will now be included in volume 10 of the DEIS.
Residents have another opportunity to provide oral comment this Saturday at the University of Guam Field House in Mangilao. The public also has until February 17th to comment on the DEIS by logging onto www.guambuildupeis.us
Monday, January 04, 2010
Military to build new wharf: Construction may affect wildlife in Apra Harbor
Military to build new wharf: Construction may affect wildlife in Apra Harbor
By Brett Kelman • Pacific Daily News • January 4, 2010
Aircraft carriers will inject new income into the local economy thanks to the coming military buildup, but the wildlife in local waters must pay a heavy price for growth.
The construction of a new aircraft carrier wharf in Inner Apra Harbor will allow the biggest ships in the Navy to quadruple the amount of time they've spent on Guam in recent years.
During each visit, thousands of sailors will come ashore and spend money that would otherwise go elsewhere, according to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, a massive document that explains what will happen when the buildup arrives.
But to build a new carrier wharf, the military must widen a shipping channel and dredge seabed that contains flourishing coral and valuable aquatic life, the document states.
A popular scuba diving site may be ruined by unsettled silt.
It is common for massive progress to force controversial trade-offs like this one, which could split public opinion down the middle, said Roseann Jones, a University of Guam professor of economics.
Some people will be happy to trade coral for commerce and some won't, Jones said. Regardless, Guam residents should understand the deal being made before their eyes.
"The public needs to have a very clear understanding of what they are trading off and if what they are getting is enough in return. They cannot be shy ... What often happens in a blizzard of economic growth is people are unsure what to ask for," Jones said.
Economic boost
Once the new wharf is functioning by 2015, aircraft carriers will spend about 63 days a year ported in Guam, according to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
About 5,600 personnel work on a single carrier, the document states.
Many of those personnel will leave their ship and explore the island. Their spending is expected to inject about $13 million into the local economy every year once the wharf is built.
Stimulus will be even higher from 2011 to 2014, when the wharf is under construction. About $21 million to $28 million of additional money will be spent on Guam during each of those four years, the draft EIS states.
Construction of the new wharf will also create nearly 1,100 civilian jobs by 2012, the EIS report states, but most of those jobs will disappear in two years when construction ends.
Money that is brought to the island from the wharf and carriers will cycle through the economy again and again, boosting Guam's Gross Island Product, Jones said.
"As the Gross Island Product ... improves, generally the economy is better off. You should be able to see it create revenues for government and better investments by governments in schools and hospitals and roads. When economies are doing better, things begin to look better."
And before that money trickles to local government it will pass through the hands of local businesses. Some land-starved sailors will spend on everything and anything.
That includes tattoos, said Harv Angel.
More carriers and sailors can only benefit Angel's business, Low Tide Tattoo. Angel said he is looking forward to the days when the wharf is complete.
"Cha-ching!" Angel said Thursday, laughing. "This will help everybody -- from me to Kmart. Those dollars go through the entire community."
Reef destroyed
Although the new wharf may promise a step forward for Guam's economy, it will leave a big footprint on the bottom of Apra Harbor.
The military must clear a path through the shallows leading to the wharf so the gigantic carriers have enough space and depth to maneuver through the harbor, according to the draft EIS report.
The Department of Defense plans to widen an existing shipping channel so a carrier can fit through. To create a turning basin near the wharf, about 2.3 million square feet of sea floor will be dredged.
That's enough space for 40 football fields or 2,000 average-sized Guam homes.
About 35 percent of that area is covered in coral reef that will be permanently destroyed, the draft EIS states.
Brent Tibbatts, fisheries biologist at the Guam Department of Agriculture, said the military is underestimating the amount of coral in the dredging area.
Because the Department of Defense used satellite imagery to measure the coral in the area, it is difficult to calculate how high it is piled.
For example: A meter of coral or three meters of coral would look about the same from space, Tibbatts said. But smaller, rarer life could be hidden where the satellites can't see.
"Supposedly, there have been things found in Apra Harbor that have been found growing nowhere else in Guam," Tibbatts said.
One of those things are 6-foot brilliant blue elephant ear sponges that stand out among the common mounds of yellow, brown and green coral.
It is rare for a busy port to be teeming with marine life like Apra Harbor, Tibbatts said. Most of the ports of the Pacific have barren sea bottoms, not lively ecosystems.
Many of the organisms in Apra Harbor will be buried during the dredging, according to the Draft EIS. Some will survive and seek new homes elsewhere in weeks or months, the document states. Other colonies of fish that are attached to their territory -- like damselfish, clownfish and butterfly fish -- will die.
The draft EIS also states that ship traffic and dredging will create "short-term" disruption in the birthing area for scalloped hammerhead sharks. The sharks give birth directly in the carriers' path into the wharf, the draft EIS states.
Although the adult hammerheads spread to waters around the island, Apra Harbor is the only place they consistently return to give birth.
If the dredging lasts more than a year, it could easily disturb two breeding cycles for the sharks, Tibbatts said. Since they only give birth to a few babies a year, local populations will be affected.
"It would not be easy for them to replenish the population if something impacts their ability to pup," he said.
The damage done to the marine ecosystem could be worse, according to the draft EIS.
Currently, the projected route of carriers would pass between several reefs out to halfway across Outer Apra Harbor. Then it would turn sharply to the left and sail straight out to sea.
From a navigational standpoint, it would be preferable to sail straight out of the harbor or make a more gradual turn, but these options were dismissed because they would damage too much coral, the document states.
Spreading silt
There is no question that some coral will be destroyed directly during the wharf's construction, but the military and local experts disagree about the large-scale impact of dredging in Apra Harbor.
Although the project will uproot about 600,000 cubic yards of sea floor, silt will only spread about 40 feet outside the dredging zone, according to computer models cited in the draft EIS.
A 200-meter "indirect impact" buffer encircles the dredging zone, but the military has overestimated the spread of silt as a precaution, the document states. This buffer is "very conservative," the document states.
Tibbatts doesn't think so.
"I've looked at the computer modeling they've done and my concern is that it is just a model. It's not reality," he said on Wednesday. "We've had experience with other dredging projects in the harbor where modeling said silt wouldn't go beyond a certain point and in reality it went far beyond."
When the military built Kilo Wharf in the harbor in the 1980s, silt spread farther than expected, he said. When the military dredged the harbor to expand Kilo Wharf last year, silt again spread farther than expected.
Those projects were nowhere near as large as the dredging needed for the new wharf. If estimates are wrong again, nearby reefs -- including popular dive site Western Shoals -- could be dusted with disturbed silt.
The silt would starve the reef by blocking sunlight and stunting the food chain before it begins, Tibbatts said. Once silt settles, coral would become unhealthy because it must waste energy to shed the coat of silt.
Western Shoals
If the coral at Western Shoals is weakened, the fish that depend on the reef will leave or die. When those fish are gone, their predators will look elsewhere for food.
And when life empties off the reef, the scuba divers won't go to Western Shoals. Currently, many go there every day.
The west face of the horseshoe-shaped reef slopes gradually from the surface to the depths and is home to a startling amount of fish, said Pete Peterson, a scuba expert who hosts Diver Below, a local television show.
"There are an amazing amount of critters in that one area and it's a very easy dive so a lot of beginning divers go there," Peterson said. "Every day the tour companies go there."
Like Tibbatts, Peterson is confident dredging will spread silt farther than the military estimates.
During the last 15 years, increased ship traffic and dredging in the harbor has reduced visibility for scuba divers by 50 percent and destroyed a quarter of the coral, Peterson said.
Because the harbor is sheltered by land, tides don't sweep very much loose sediment out to sea. Most of the silt settles on the harbor bottom and stays forever, waiting to be stirred up by the next passing ship, he said.
By Brett Kelman • Pacific Daily News • January 4, 2010
Aircraft carriers will inject new income into the local economy thanks to the coming military buildup, but the wildlife in local waters must pay a heavy price for growth.
The construction of a new aircraft carrier wharf in Inner Apra Harbor will allow the biggest ships in the Navy to quadruple the amount of time they've spent on Guam in recent years.
During each visit, thousands of sailors will come ashore and spend money that would otherwise go elsewhere, according to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, a massive document that explains what will happen when the buildup arrives.
But to build a new carrier wharf, the military must widen a shipping channel and dredge seabed that contains flourishing coral and valuable aquatic life, the document states.
A popular scuba diving site may be ruined by unsettled silt.
It is common for massive progress to force controversial trade-offs like this one, which could split public opinion down the middle, said Roseann Jones, a University of Guam professor of economics.
Some people will be happy to trade coral for commerce and some won't, Jones said. Regardless, Guam residents should understand the deal being made before their eyes.
"The public needs to have a very clear understanding of what they are trading off and if what they are getting is enough in return. They cannot be shy ... What often happens in a blizzard of economic growth is people are unsure what to ask for," Jones said.
Economic boost
Once the new wharf is functioning by 2015, aircraft carriers will spend about 63 days a year ported in Guam, according to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
About 5,600 personnel work on a single carrier, the document states.
Many of those personnel will leave their ship and explore the island. Their spending is expected to inject about $13 million into the local economy every year once the wharf is built.
Stimulus will be even higher from 2011 to 2014, when the wharf is under construction. About $21 million to $28 million of additional money will be spent on Guam during each of those four years, the draft EIS states.
Construction of the new wharf will also create nearly 1,100 civilian jobs by 2012, the EIS report states, but most of those jobs will disappear in two years when construction ends.
Money that is brought to the island from the wharf and carriers will cycle through the economy again and again, boosting Guam's Gross Island Product, Jones said.
"As the Gross Island Product ... improves, generally the economy is better off. You should be able to see it create revenues for government and better investments by governments in schools and hospitals and roads. When economies are doing better, things begin to look better."
And before that money trickles to local government it will pass through the hands of local businesses. Some land-starved sailors will spend on everything and anything.
That includes tattoos, said Harv Angel.
More carriers and sailors can only benefit Angel's business, Low Tide Tattoo. Angel said he is looking forward to the days when the wharf is complete.
"Cha-ching!" Angel said Thursday, laughing. "This will help everybody -- from me to Kmart. Those dollars go through the entire community."
Reef destroyed
Although the new wharf may promise a step forward for Guam's economy, it will leave a big footprint on the bottom of Apra Harbor.
The military must clear a path through the shallows leading to the wharf so the gigantic carriers have enough space and depth to maneuver through the harbor, according to the draft EIS report.
The Department of Defense plans to widen an existing shipping channel so a carrier can fit through. To create a turning basin near the wharf, about 2.3 million square feet of sea floor will be dredged.
That's enough space for 40 football fields or 2,000 average-sized Guam homes.
About 35 percent of that area is covered in coral reef that will be permanently destroyed, the draft EIS states.
Brent Tibbatts, fisheries biologist at the Guam Department of Agriculture, said the military is underestimating the amount of coral in the dredging area.
Because the Department of Defense used satellite imagery to measure the coral in the area, it is difficult to calculate how high it is piled.
For example: A meter of coral or three meters of coral would look about the same from space, Tibbatts said. But smaller, rarer life could be hidden where the satellites can't see.
"Supposedly, there have been things found in Apra Harbor that have been found growing nowhere else in Guam," Tibbatts said.
One of those things are 6-foot brilliant blue elephant ear sponges that stand out among the common mounds of yellow, brown and green coral.
It is rare for a busy port to be teeming with marine life like Apra Harbor, Tibbatts said. Most of the ports of the Pacific have barren sea bottoms, not lively ecosystems.
Many of the organisms in Apra Harbor will be buried during the dredging, according to the Draft EIS. Some will survive and seek new homes elsewhere in weeks or months, the document states. Other colonies of fish that are attached to their territory -- like damselfish, clownfish and butterfly fish -- will die.
The draft EIS also states that ship traffic and dredging will create "short-term" disruption in the birthing area for scalloped hammerhead sharks. The sharks give birth directly in the carriers' path into the wharf, the draft EIS states.
Although the adult hammerheads spread to waters around the island, Apra Harbor is the only place they consistently return to give birth.
If the dredging lasts more than a year, it could easily disturb two breeding cycles for the sharks, Tibbatts said. Since they only give birth to a few babies a year, local populations will be affected.
"It would not be easy for them to replenish the population if something impacts their ability to pup," he said.
The damage done to the marine ecosystem could be worse, according to the draft EIS.
Currently, the projected route of carriers would pass between several reefs out to halfway across Outer Apra Harbor. Then it would turn sharply to the left and sail straight out to sea.
From a navigational standpoint, it would be preferable to sail straight out of the harbor or make a more gradual turn, but these options were dismissed because they would damage too much coral, the document states.
Spreading silt
There is no question that some coral will be destroyed directly during the wharf's construction, but the military and local experts disagree about the large-scale impact of dredging in Apra Harbor.
Although the project will uproot about 600,000 cubic yards of sea floor, silt will only spread about 40 feet outside the dredging zone, according to computer models cited in the draft EIS.
A 200-meter "indirect impact" buffer encircles the dredging zone, but the military has overestimated the spread of silt as a precaution, the document states. This buffer is "very conservative," the document states.
Tibbatts doesn't think so.
"I've looked at the computer modeling they've done and my concern is that it is just a model. It's not reality," he said on Wednesday. "We've had experience with other dredging projects in the harbor where modeling said silt wouldn't go beyond a certain point and in reality it went far beyond."
When the military built Kilo Wharf in the harbor in the 1980s, silt spread farther than expected, he said. When the military dredged the harbor to expand Kilo Wharf last year, silt again spread farther than expected.
Those projects were nowhere near as large as the dredging needed for the new wharf. If estimates are wrong again, nearby reefs -- including popular dive site Western Shoals -- could be dusted with disturbed silt.
The silt would starve the reef by blocking sunlight and stunting the food chain before it begins, Tibbatts said. Once silt settles, coral would become unhealthy because it must waste energy to shed the coat of silt.
Western Shoals
If the coral at Western Shoals is weakened, the fish that depend on the reef will leave or die. When those fish are gone, their predators will look elsewhere for food.
And when life empties off the reef, the scuba divers won't go to Western Shoals. Currently, many go there every day.
The west face of the horseshoe-shaped reef slopes gradually from the surface to the depths and is home to a startling amount of fish, said Pete Peterson, a scuba expert who hosts Diver Below, a local television show.
"There are an amazing amount of critters in that one area and it's a very easy dive so a lot of beginning divers go there," Peterson said. "Every day the tour companies go there."
Like Tibbatts, Peterson is confident dredging will spread silt farther than the military estimates.
During the last 15 years, increased ship traffic and dredging in the harbor has reduced visibility for scuba divers by 50 percent and destroyed a quarter of the coral, Peterson said.
Because the harbor is sheltered by land, tides don't sweep very much loose sediment out to sea. Most of the silt settles on the harbor bottom and stays forever, waiting to be stirred up by the next passing ship, he said.
Sunday, January 03, 2010
FOCUS: U.S. military eyes Guam as staging post to counter threats
FOCUS: U.S. military eyes Guam as staging post to counter threats
January 02 2010 19:12
Saturday, January 02, 2010 5:13 AM
HAGATNA, Jan. 2, 2010 (Kyodo News International) -- The United States plans to fortify Guam, upgrading its military base on the island into a strategic staging post that would allow rapid access to potential flashpoints in the Pacific region.
More troops, including 9,182 Marines, army soldiers and their dependents from Okinawa, Japan, will be relocated to this island, while more than 9,000 transient troops, mainly from the navy's carrier strike group, will also be based here.
The ''overarching purpose'' of beefing up Guam as a military fortress is ''to provide mutual defense, deter aggression, and dissuade coercion in the Western Pacific Region, according to a draft impact report recently released by the U.S. Defense Department.
The proposed buildup would allow U.S. military forces to respond to regional threats and contingencies in a ''flexible'' and ''timely manner'' as they work to ''defend U.S., Japan and allied interests,'' the study says.
''Moving these forces to Guam would place them on the furthest forward element of sovereign U.S. territory in the Pacific, thereby maximizing their freedom of action,'' it says.
According to the report, the United States envisions Guam as a ''local command and control structure'' manned, equipped, trained, and sustained by a modern logistics infrastructure.
The relocation and buildup cost, including expansion of infrastructure needed to maintain a permanent base for Marines and U.S. Army troops on Guam and Tinian, an island 160 kilometers to the northeast, is pegged at $12 billion. Japan has agreed to chip in $6.09 billion of the total.
The plan would entail ''increased operational activities,'' more frequent berthing by aircraft carriers and other warships, building aviation training ranges and upgrading of harbors, wharves and ports.
The existing Andersen Air Force Base on Guam would be expanded to include the air elements of the Marines. A new Marine base would be built ''right next door,'' the study says.
Various firing ranges would be built to meet the various training requirements of a larger military contingent.
The U.S. also plans to expand its live fire training ranges in Tinian where about 200 or more Marines could ''realistically train'' with their weapons and equipment ''without restrictions.''
Also on the drawing board is the building of a deep-draft wharf at Guam's Apra Harbor to support nuclear-powered aircraft carriers transiting through the area.
A U.S. Army ''Air and Missile Defense Task Force'' is also proposed for Guam to protect the island and U.S. forces there against the threat of harm from ballistic missile attacks.
Weapons emplacement sites would be constructed to accommodate the ''Terminal High Altitude Area Defense'' system, which is designed to intercept missiles during late mid-course or final stage flight.
Other emplacement sites would accommodate Patriot missiles, which are designed to strike threat aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and cruise missiles just before impact.
The U.S military is beefing up its presence in Guam after U.S. allies in the Pacific -- the Philippines, Thailand, Australia, South Korea and Singapore -- turned down U.S. requests for permanent basing of U.S. troops on their soil.
Already concerns are being raised over plans to transform Guam into ''a multi-service military base.''
''Some of the areas that they're planning to convert into firing ranges include pristine limestone forested areas that will require some clearing of native forest trees,'' Jeffrey Quitugua, a biologist, told Kyodo News.
Judith Guthertz, a senator in the Guam Legislature who chairs the military buildup committee, is concerned over ''land condemnation or land takings.''
''That is a very emotional issue for the people of Guam because of what happened after World War II where the federal government condemned so much land on Guam. We don't want a repeat of that,'' she told Kyodo News in an interview.
Henry Simpson, general manager of Guam Racing Federation, said the U.S. military aims to take his race track without even consulting him. ''They want to run over our land,'' he said.
But Paul Shintaku, executive director of the Guam Buildup Office, in the Guam governor's office, said public consultations are ongoing, with a series of fora scheduled in January to enlighten the public on the plan.
Guam's government also scoffs at fears the plan will make the island prone to attacks by U.S. enemies.
''I don't see it as painting a bigger red target on us,'' Shintaku's deputy Nora Camacho said. ''Of course we have that red light, that red circle around us...but there's a deterrence.''
(Source: iStockAnalyst)
SEE ALSO:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The overarching purpose for the proposed actions is to locate U.S. military forces to meet international agreement and treaty obligations and fulfill U.S. government national security to provide mutual defense, deter aggression, and dissuade coercion in the Western Pacific Region. The need of the proposed actions is to meet various criteria based upon U.S. policy, international agreements, and treaties, including but not limited to positioning forces to defend the homeland and U.S. Pacific territories; respond within a timely response range; maintain regional stability; provide flexibility to respond to regional threats; defend U.S., Japan, and allied interests, and other defense related criteria. Guam's location as the westernmost part of the United States is critical to U.S. national security interests. In implementing U.S. national security policy, the Department of Defense would increase the role of Guam and the CNMI through the relocation of Marines to Guam, increased presence of a transient aircraft carrier, and enhanced capability to protect the U.S. homeland, Pacific territories, forces, and its allies from ballistic missile attacks.
As a result of reviews of the U.S. defense posture in the Pacific region and a parallel review of U.S. force posture supporting the U.S. alliance with Japan, a portion of U.S. Marine Corps forces currently located in Okinawa, Japan would be relocated to Guam. This relocation is proposed to occur concurrent with proposed wharf construction in Guam's Apra Harbor to support the Navy transiting nuclear aircraft carriers. An Army AMDTF is also proposed for Guam to protect the U.S homeland, Pacific territories, forces and its allies against the threat of harm from ballistic missile attacks.
Federal Register: November 20, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 223)
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-27960.htm
January 02 2010 19:12
Saturday, January 02, 2010 5:13 AM
HAGATNA, Jan. 2, 2010 (Kyodo News International) -- The United States plans to fortify Guam, upgrading its military base on the island into a strategic staging post that would allow rapid access to potential flashpoints in the Pacific region.
More troops, including 9,182 Marines, army soldiers and their dependents from Okinawa, Japan, will be relocated to this island, while more than 9,000 transient troops, mainly from the navy's carrier strike group, will also be based here.
The ''overarching purpose'' of beefing up Guam as a military fortress is ''to provide mutual defense, deter aggression, and dissuade coercion in the Western Pacific Region, according to a draft impact report recently released by the U.S. Defense Department.
The proposed buildup would allow U.S. military forces to respond to regional threats and contingencies in a ''flexible'' and ''timely manner'' as they work to ''defend U.S., Japan and allied interests,'' the study says.
''Moving these forces to Guam would place them on the furthest forward element of sovereign U.S. territory in the Pacific, thereby maximizing their freedom of action,'' it says.
According to the report, the United States envisions Guam as a ''local command and control structure'' manned, equipped, trained, and sustained by a modern logistics infrastructure.
The relocation and buildup cost, including expansion of infrastructure needed to maintain a permanent base for Marines and U.S. Army troops on Guam and Tinian, an island 160 kilometers to the northeast, is pegged at $12 billion. Japan has agreed to chip in $6.09 billion of the total.
The plan would entail ''increased operational activities,'' more frequent berthing by aircraft carriers and other warships, building aviation training ranges and upgrading of harbors, wharves and ports.
The existing Andersen Air Force Base on Guam would be expanded to include the air elements of the Marines. A new Marine base would be built ''right next door,'' the study says.
Various firing ranges would be built to meet the various training requirements of a larger military contingent.
The U.S. also plans to expand its live fire training ranges in Tinian where about 200 or more Marines could ''realistically train'' with their weapons and equipment ''without restrictions.''
Also on the drawing board is the building of a deep-draft wharf at Guam's Apra Harbor to support nuclear-powered aircraft carriers transiting through the area.
A U.S. Army ''Air and Missile Defense Task Force'' is also proposed for Guam to protect the island and U.S. forces there against the threat of harm from ballistic missile attacks.
Weapons emplacement sites would be constructed to accommodate the ''Terminal High Altitude Area Defense'' system, which is designed to intercept missiles during late mid-course or final stage flight.
Other emplacement sites would accommodate Patriot missiles, which are designed to strike threat aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and cruise missiles just before impact.
The U.S military is beefing up its presence in Guam after U.S. allies in the Pacific -- the Philippines, Thailand, Australia, South Korea and Singapore -- turned down U.S. requests for permanent basing of U.S. troops on their soil.
Already concerns are being raised over plans to transform Guam into ''a multi-service military base.''
''Some of the areas that they're planning to convert into firing ranges include pristine limestone forested areas that will require some clearing of native forest trees,'' Jeffrey Quitugua, a biologist, told Kyodo News.
Judith Guthertz, a senator in the Guam Legislature who chairs the military buildup committee, is concerned over ''land condemnation or land takings.''
''That is a very emotional issue for the people of Guam because of what happened after World War II where the federal government condemned so much land on Guam. We don't want a repeat of that,'' she told Kyodo News in an interview.
Henry Simpson, general manager of Guam Racing Federation, said the U.S. military aims to take his race track without even consulting him. ''They want to run over our land,'' he said.
But Paul Shintaku, executive director of the Guam Buildup Office, in the Guam governor's office, said public consultations are ongoing, with a series of fora scheduled in January to enlighten the public on the plan.
Guam's government also scoffs at fears the plan will make the island prone to attacks by U.S. enemies.
''I don't see it as painting a bigger red target on us,'' Shintaku's deputy Nora Camacho said. ''Of course we have that red light, that red circle around us...but there's a deterrence.''
(Source: iStockAnalyst)
SEE ALSO:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The overarching purpose for the proposed actions is to locate U.S. military forces to meet international agreement and treaty obligations and fulfill U.S. government national security to provide mutual defense, deter aggression, and dissuade coercion in the Western Pacific Region. The need of the proposed actions is to meet various criteria based upon U.S. policy, international agreements, and treaties, including but not limited to positioning forces to defend the homeland and U.S. Pacific territories; respond within a timely response range; maintain regional stability; provide flexibility to respond to regional threats; defend U.S., Japan, and allied interests, and other defense related criteria. Guam's location as the westernmost part of the United States is critical to U.S. national security interests. In implementing U.S. national security policy, the Department of Defense would increase the role of Guam and the CNMI through the relocation of Marines to Guam, increased presence of a transient aircraft carrier, and enhanced capability to protect the U.S. homeland, Pacific territories, forces, and its allies from ballistic missile attacks.
As a result of reviews of the U.S. defense posture in the Pacific region and a parallel review of U.S. force posture supporting the U.S. alliance with Japan, a portion of U.S. Marine Corps forces currently located in Okinawa, Japan would be relocated to Guam. This relocation is proposed to occur concurrent with proposed wharf construction in Guam's Apra Harbor to support the Navy transiting nuclear aircraft carriers. An Army AMDTF is also proposed for Guam to protect the U.S homeland, Pacific territories, forces and its allies against the threat of harm from ballistic missile attacks.
Federal Register: November 20, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 223)
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-27960.htm
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Agencies outline concerns with EIS
Agencies outline concerns with EIS
By Bernice Santiago • Pacific Sunday News • December 13, 2009
The public can work with Government of Guam agencies to review the draft Environmental Impact statement for the military buildup, before the comment period ends on Feb. 17.
The comment period is critical, said Vangie Lujan, administrator for the Guam Coastal Management Program, under the Bureau of Statistics and Plans. When residents submit written comments about their concerns, the Department of Defense is required by law to address them, she said.
Residents are welcome to visit the Guam Coastal Management Program office, on the third floor of the GCIC building, where a print version of the draft EIS is available to the public. GCMP staff can further explain the document itself, and help residents review the key issues that they're concerned with, whether it's road construction or the impact to the coral reefs, Lujan said.
Different local agencies introduced their roles and areas of jurisdiction in reviewing the draft EIS yesterday, during a Natural Resources Expo held at the Guam Premier Outlets. The expo was held by the Natural Resources Subcommittee of the Governor's Civilian Military Task Force, according to a release from the Bureau of Statistics and Plans.
Dave Burdick, biologist from the Guam Coastal Management Program office, discussed the proposed Nuclear Aircraft Carrier deep-draft wharf and turning basin project. The project will affect coral reef in Apra Harbor, and the agency will be looking into both the direct and indirect impacts of the proposed dredging activities.
The office also will review the impact of population growth on Guam's natural resources, Burdick said. The island's population will grow by 79,000 people in 2015, before that number decreases to 33,600 people by 2020. An increase in harvesting and recreational use of natural resources likely will occur, Burdick said.
The office also will study the mitigation efforts proposed by the Department of Defense to replace lost ecosystem function, which is required under the federal Clean Water Act.
Biologist Jeffrey Quitugua said the Department of Agriculture's Division of Aquatics and Wildlife Resources will be looking into land habitat issues for species that DAWR hope to recover or bring back to Guam, such as the kingfisher, the Guam rail, and the Marianas fruit bat, as part of their review of the draft EIS.
The Guam Environmental Protection Agency is reviewing the draft EIS while regulating growing activity from the private sector, as the private sector prepares for the buildup, said Jesse Cruz, environmental monitoring and analytical services administrator. Cruz's section will be reviewing the dredging deep-draft wharf, the terrestrial clearing for construction projects, and other natural resource issues, he said yesterday.
Lujan said another expo will be held in January, where agencies will present a more detailed analysis of the draft EIS to the public, along with their recommendations.
The aim of such outreach events is to develop a dialogue with the public, so that the concerns and comments of local government planners, scientists, and the general public inform each other, Burdick said.
By Bernice Santiago • Pacific Sunday News • December 13, 2009
The public can work with Government of Guam agencies to review the draft Environmental Impact statement for the military buildup, before the comment period ends on Feb. 17.
The comment period is critical, said Vangie Lujan, administrator for the Guam Coastal Management Program, under the Bureau of Statistics and Plans. When residents submit written comments about their concerns, the Department of Defense is required by law to address them, she said.
Residents are welcome to visit the Guam Coastal Management Program office, on the third floor of the GCIC building, where a print version of the draft EIS is available to the public. GCMP staff can further explain the document itself, and help residents review the key issues that they're concerned with, whether it's road construction or the impact to the coral reefs, Lujan said.
Different local agencies introduced their roles and areas of jurisdiction in reviewing the draft EIS yesterday, during a Natural Resources Expo held at the Guam Premier Outlets. The expo was held by the Natural Resources Subcommittee of the Governor's Civilian Military Task Force, according to a release from the Bureau of Statistics and Plans.
Dave Burdick, biologist from the Guam Coastal Management Program office, discussed the proposed Nuclear Aircraft Carrier deep-draft wharf and turning basin project. The project will affect coral reef in Apra Harbor, and the agency will be looking into both the direct and indirect impacts of the proposed dredging activities.
The office also will review the impact of population growth on Guam's natural resources, Burdick said. The island's population will grow by 79,000 people in 2015, before that number decreases to 33,600 people by 2020. An increase in harvesting and recreational use of natural resources likely will occur, Burdick said.
The office also will study the mitigation efforts proposed by the Department of Defense to replace lost ecosystem function, which is required under the federal Clean Water Act.
Biologist Jeffrey Quitugua said the Department of Agriculture's Division of Aquatics and Wildlife Resources will be looking into land habitat issues for species that DAWR hope to recover or bring back to Guam, such as the kingfisher, the Guam rail, and the Marianas fruit bat, as part of their review of the draft EIS.
The Guam Environmental Protection Agency is reviewing the draft EIS while regulating growing activity from the private sector, as the private sector prepares for the buildup, said Jesse Cruz, environmental monitoring and analytical services administrator. Cruz's section will be reviewing the dredging deep-draft wharf, the terrestrial clearing for construction projects, and other natural resource issues, he said yesterday.
Lujan said another expo will be held in January, where agencies will present a more detailed analysis of the draft EIS to the public, along with their recommendations.
The aim of such outreach events is to develop a dialogue with the public, so that the concerns and comments of local government planners, scientists, and the general public inform each other, Burdick said.
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Sifting through the Draft EIS
Sifting through the Draft EIS
Posted: Dec 01, 2009 10:04 PM PST
by John Davis
Guam - As I continue to read and review the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, I continue to find unclear language that is a cause for concern. Today, let's talk about the DEIS VOLUME 4. Volume 4 explains the need, purpose and impacts of constructing a deep-draft wharf to support an aircraft carrier and Carrier Strike Group.
The purpose and need for the deep-draft wharf is to allow the Navy the ability to locate military forces to meet international agreements and treaty requirements to fulfill U.S. National security requirements to provide mutual defense, deter aggression and dissuade coercion in the Western pacific Region. Satisfying those requirements also include positioning forces to defend the homeland, including U.S. Territories and provide a location with a timely response range. This is probably why Guam is referred to by the Federal Government as the "Tip of the spear." However; I have a different opinion to why our island is referred to as the U.S. Military's Tip of the spear in the region. For example, if the Department of defense were as business and it was looking to branch out in our region, despite the fact they have satellite offices (military bases) all over the globe, Guam would be the best location to engage, show presence and deter aggression in the western pacific region.
With the prime location for the increase in U.S. Military presence already determined, let's focus on more DEIS language that raises more cause for concern. Allowing visiting and transient aircraft carriers and carrier strike groups to move freely through Guam and international waters throughout the region attempts to maintain regional stability, peace and security. Another goal of being able to support aircraft carriers and CSG's is to provide a powerful U.S. presence within the Western Pacific Region. Will the military only focus on beefing up the Western Pacific region? If the U.S. Military will only focus on increasing strength in the western pacific region with a population of billions of people, what about the millions of people living in the Atlantic Region?
According to DOD, the global perspective is to have aircraft carriers deployed world wide to support U.S. interests and commitments. On the other hand, I say DOD's DEIS is full of non-commitment. We have not received any guarantees related to cost sharing measures to fund the military buildup. In fact, the only commitment Guam has received from the U.S. military is that there will be 8 thousand Marines and about 72 thousand other support personnel on Guam by 2014. What OTHER U.S. interest requires a deep-berthing wharf for an aircraft carrier and strike group other than the war on terror? Is Guam under threat from China, North Korea, Russia, Malaysia or the Republic of the Philippines? I'm sure our people would like to know what kind of ride they're in for.
Furthermore, the DEIS states the employment of a CSG is integral to supporting U.S. interests and meeting treaty and alliance requirements globally and nationally. More gray area if you ask me. What the DEIS doesn't spell out is whether or not there is a risk for the U.S. to be in violation of a particular treaty? What about an alliance internationally or is the U.S. at risk of violating national interests? If not, why not build up Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands or American Samoa? With respect to global interests, why not have this buildup somewhere else around the globe, why does it have to be Guam? Is it because we as a people have not determined our political status? I think so, but it would be nice if the DOD admitted it.
After the construction of a deep-berthing wharf, the DEIS indicates the Aircraft Carriers mission will be to provide credible, sustainable, independent presence and conventional deterrence during peace time. What I would like the DOD to indicate is whether or not the Western Pacific Region is at peace now. There are several ongoing conflicts ongoing right now in the Western Pacific Region and other regions around the world. According to information in the DEIS the aircraft carriers mission is to provide a sustainable, credible presence. Are there any projections to this buildup ever being downsized? That would be nice to know too. Aircraft carriers and CSG's will operate as the cornerstone of JOINT/ALLIED maritime expeditionary forces in times of crisis. A time of crisis would be now considering the ongoing war on terror. If the aircraft carriers will serve as the cornerstone of JOINT/ALLIED expeditionary forces, what role will Guam play other than playing host to the U.S. war machine on our native lands?
Aircraft carriers and CSG's will launch and support attacks on enemies, protect friendly forces and engage in sustained independent operations of war. Who exactly are the "enemies" and what are independent operations of war?
When all is said and done, after all the construction and migration of U.S. military forces to Guam, the navy plans to adjust its force posture and basing to position at least 6 operationally sustainable carriers and 60 percent of its submarines in the pacific to support engagement, presence and deterrence. I understand these 6 carriers will be able to move around the Western pacific region, pulling in and out of port whenever they please, but can DOD or the navy confirm whether or not at least one aircraft carrier and CSG will call Guam its home port? If so, then I'm looking forward to an increase in Section 30 Revenues. On the other hand, aircraft carriers are deemed a sovereign U.S. Territory, which is why I think this is a potential out for DOD not to increase section 30 funding to GovGuam. I would also like to know if any nuclear submarines will call Guam their home port as well. If this is true, then how will the Navy or DOD ensure there isn't another radioactive material leak?
When the DOD says "support engagement, presence and deterrence, it that the order of priority? Does the DOD plan to engage enemies before showing presence and deterring engagement? I would like to think the humanitarian way would be to first show presence, second deter and third and lastly engagement.
Not to worry readers, I'm not quite done reviewing the 400 pages of volume 4, if you've read volume 4 or any other part of the DEIS, chime in, I'd like to read your comments.
Posted: Dec 01, 2009 10:04 PM PST
by John Davis
Guam - As I continue to read and review the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, I continue to find unclear language that is a cause for concern. Today, let's talk about the DEIS VOLUME 4. Volume 4 explains the need, purpose and impacts of constructing a deep-draft wharf to support an aircraft carrier and Carrier Strike Group.
The purpose and need for the deep-draft wharf is to allow the Navy the ability to locate military forces to meet international agreements and treaty requirements to fulfill U.S. National security requirements to provide mutual defense, deter aggression and dissuade coercion in the Western pacific Region. Satisfying those requirements also include positioning forces to defend the homeland, including U.S. Territories and provide a location with a timely response range. This is probably why Guam is referred to by the Federal Government as the "Tip of the spear." However; I have a different opinion to why our island is referred to as the U.S. Military's Tip of the spear in the region. For example, if the Department of defense were as business and it was looking to branch out in our region, despite the fact they have satellite offices (military bases) all over the globe, Guam would be the best location to engage, show presence and deter aggression in the western pacific region.
With the prime location for the increase in U.S. Military presence already determined, let's focus on more DEIS language that raises more cause for concern. Allowing visiting and transient aircraft carriers and carrier strike groups to move freely through Guam and international waters throughout the region attempts to maintain regional stability, peace and security. Another goal of being able to support aircraft carriers and CSG's is to provide a powerful U.S. presence within the Western Pacific Region. Will the military only focus on beefing up the Western Pacific region? If the U.S. Military will only focus on increasing strength in the western pacific region with a population of billions of people, what about the millions of people living in the Atlantic Region?
According to DOD, the global perspective is to have aircraft carriers deployed world wide to support U.S. interests and commitments. On the other hand, I say DOD's DEIS is full of non-commitment. We have not received any guarantees related to cost sharing measures to fund the military buildup. In fact, the only commitment Guam has received from the U.S. military is that there will be 8 thousand Marines and about 72 thousand other support personnel on Guam by 2014. What OTHER U.S. interest requires a deep-berthing wharf for an aircraft carrier and strike group other than the war on terror? Is Guam under threat from China, North Korea, Russia, Malaysia or the Republic of the Philippines? I'm sure our people would like to know what kind of ride they're in for.
Furthermore, the DEIS states the employment of a CSG is integral to supporting U.S. interests and meeting treaty and alliance requirements globally and nationally. More gray area if you ask me. What the DEIS doesn't spell out is whether or not there is a risk for the U.S. to be in violation of a particular treaty? What about an alliance internationally or is the U.S. at risk of violating national interests? If not, why not build up Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands or American Samoa? With respect to global interests, why not have this buildup somewhere else around the globe, why does it have to be Guam? Is it because we as a people have not determined our political status? I think so, but it would be nice if the DOD admitted it.
After the construction of a deep-berthing wharf, the DEIS indicates the Aircraft Carriers mission will be to provide credible, sustainable, independent presence and conventional deterrence during peace time. What I would like the DOD to indicate is whether or not the Western Pacific Region is at peace now. There are several ongoing conflicts ongoing right now in the Western Pacific Region and other regions around the world. According to information in the DEIS the aircraft carriers mission is to provide a sustainable, credible presence. Are there any projections to this buildup ever being downsized? That would be nice to know too. Aircraft carriers and CSG's will operate as the cornerstone of JOINT/ALLIED maritime expeditionary forces in times of crisis. A time of crisis would be now considering the ongoing war on terror. If the aircraft carriers will serve as the cornerstone of JOINT/ALLIED expeditionary forces, what role will Guam play other than playing host to the U.S. war machine on our native lands?
Aircraft carriers and CSG's will launch and support attacks on enemies, protect friendly forces and engage in sustained independent operations of war. Who exactly are the "enemies" and what are independent operations of war?
When all is said and done, after all the construction and migration of U.S. military forces to Guam, the navy plans to adjust its force posture and basing to position at least 6 operationally sustainable carriers and 60 percent of its submarines in the pacific to support engagement, presence and deterrence. I understand these 6 carriers will be able to move around the Western pacific region, pulling in and out of port whenever they please, but can DOD or the navy confirm whether or not at least one aircraft carrier and CSG will call Guam its home port? If so, then I'm looking forward to an increase in Section 30 Revenues. On the other hand, aircraft carriers are deemed a sovereign U.S. Territory, which is why I think this is a potential out for DOD not to increase section 30 funding to GovGuam. I would also like to know if any nuclear submarines will call Guam their home port as well. If this is true, then how will the Navy or DOD ensure there isn't another radioactive material leak?
When the DOD says "support engagement, presence and deterrence, it that the order of priority? Does the DOD plan to engage enemies before showing presence and deterring engagement? I would like to think the humanitarian way would be to first show presence, second deter and third and lastly engagement.
Not to worry readers, I'm not quite done reviewing the 400 pages of volume 4, if you've read volume 4 or any other part of the DEIS, chime in, I'd like to read your comments.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Guam needs guarantees from the federal government
Guam needs guarantees from the federal government
Posted: Nov 29, 2009 10:38 PM PST
by John Davis
It's been about a week now that the Draft Environmental impact Statement has been released for public digestion and open for comments, but as you read the 11 thousand page document you'll notice that the DEIS is a bunch of bullet points about the upcoming military buildup offering no real solutions or guarantees regarding the impact to Guam residents.
Aside from the federal government relocating 8 thousand marines from Okinawa, Japan to Guam, island residents can look forward to another 72 thousand people making their way to Guam in search of job opportunities and a better life. Island residents can also look forward to the feds taking more land for their use without the consent of the local government or local residents. The Federal government plans to use more Guam land for military training grounds and military housing. The feds will also construct infrastructure to support an Aircraft carrier strike group at Apra harbor. To date, island residents have a better idea of what the federal government plans to do to support military forces with the Guam buildup, but we don't know how much will come out of Guam's pocketbook and how much will come out of the federal governments pocketbook, that's a big problem.
The department of defense is eyeing at least 3 pieces of property to use as training and housing facilities. These properties are located at the old FAA property near NCTAMS, the Marbo Sea Command property in Mangilao. The third and newest piece of property propsed to be used by the federal government disturbs me the most. The property is located near the southern villages of Agat and Umatac known as Mount Jumullong Manglo. You may be familiar with this property considering thousands of island residents come to this area every year to express their catholic faith on a pilgrimage to the top of this mountain on Good Friday.
The feds plan to use the pilgrimage property to train hundreds of Marines at once. Soldiers training on the land will conduct jungle and navigation training for 12 weeks of the year. Does this mean that after 3 months of military training and exercises the land will be opened back up? I don't think so, even if the feds say the road to be built on top of the existing hiking trail will be lined with locked gates and barriers will keep any civilians from traversing the area. Is it good news for residents that these gates and barriers will be unmanned? What about the protection of National Security? If I were planning the use of this land for the federal government, I would keep this training area under lock and key t all times. I would not allow an avenue for a breach of security because the federal government wants to portray a friendly relationship with the Chamorro people.
On the other hand, the property located at the old FAA and Marbo Sea Command are being eyed by residents owed ancestral lands after the Guam International Airport Authority took their Tiyan land for GIAA improvements. There is existing public law that provides an avenue for compensation of Tiyan landowners, so if these two pieces of property are supposed to be given to residents for their use, why would we want to lease it to the federal government? Better yet, if the property is taken by the federal government, will Tiyan landowners be compensated at fair market value or will the federal government use their powers of condemnation? In the past, the feds have taken land without compensation or input from residents, so why would it change?
Lastly, the Department of Defense will be constructing a deep-draft wharf to support aircraft carrier personnel. Projections contained in the DEIS show 63 aircraft carrier visits per year at 21 days of less per visit.
That's an additional 5600 military personnel on Guam every time a CSG anchors down at Apra Harbor. These 5600 military personnel will be granted liberty to see the sights and shores around the island, but who will be protecting local residents from military personnel when they are out and about? I don't think the Navy has enough Shore patrol officers to handle 5600 military personnel on the streets of Guam during liberty. In order to support the aircraft carrier, shore side infrastructure must be upgraded. That means, power, water, wastewater infrastructure will be upgraded, but who will pay for it? GovGuam, DOD, DON? I'm not so sure considering there have not been any guarantees from the federal government regarding cost sharing measures for infrastructure upgrades directly related to the military buildup.
Now that the DEIS is open for comment, all residents should look into it and be prepared to ask for guarantees from the federal government. We know what's about to happen, but we don't know how those affected will be compensated or if there will be any compensation from the federal government at all.
Guam needs guarantees that come with matching federal dollars for every dollar our local government spends. I personally believe that the federal government should fund construction of Haul roads, power and water infrastructure and building new schools because this massive buildup will impact all services provided by our local government. After all they are visitors on our island, Guam is our home and if the feds are going to change our way of life they should foot the bill.
The views and opinions expressed on KUAM Columns do not reflect those of Pacific Telestations, Inc. or its advertisers
Posted: Nov 29, 2009 10:38 PM PST
by John Davis
It's been about a week now that the Draft Environmental impact Statement has been released for public digestion and open for comments, but as you read the 11 thousand page document you'll notice that the DEIS is a bunch of bullet points about the upcoming military buildup offering no real solutions or guarantees regarding the impact to Guam residents.
Aside from the federal government relocating 8 thousand marines from Okinawa, Japan to Guam, island residents can look forward to another 72 thousand people making their way to Guam in search of job opportunities and a better life. Island residents can also look forward to the feds taking more land for their use without the consent of the local government or local residents. The Federal government plans to use more Guam land for military training grounds and military housing. The feds will also construct infrastructure to support an Aircraft carrier strike group at Apra harbor. To date, island residents have a better idea of what the federal government plans to do to support military forces with the Guam buildup, but we don't know how much will come out of Guam's pocketbook and how much will come out of the federal governments pocketbook, that's a big problem.
The department of defense is eyeing at least 3 pieces of property to use as training and housing facilities. These properties are located at the old FAA property near NCTAMS, the Marbo Sea Command property in Mangilao. The third and newest piece of property propsed to be used by the federal government disturbs me the most. The property is located near the southern villages of Agat and Umatac known as Mount Jumullong Manglo. You may be familiar with this property considering thousands of island residents come to this area every year to express their catholic faith on a pilgrimage to the top of this mountain on Good Friday.
The feds plan to use the pilgrimage property to train hundreds of Marines at once. Soldiers training on the land will conduct jungle and navigation training for 12 weeks of the year. Does this mean that after 3 months of military training and exercises the land will be opened back up? I don't think so, even if the feds say the road to be built on top of the existing hiking trail will be lined with locked gates and barriers will keep any civilians from traversing the area. Is it good news for residents that these gates and barriers will be unmanned? What about the protection of National Security? If I were planning the use of this land for the federal government, I would keep this training area under lock and key t all times. I would not allow an avenue for a breach of security because the federal government wants to portray a friendly relationship with the Chamorro people.
On the other hand, the property located at the old FAA and Marbo Sea Command are being eyed by residents owed ancestral lands after the Guam International Airport Authority took their Tiyan land for GIAA improvements. There is existing public law that provides an avenue for compensation of Tiyan landowners, so if these two pieces of property are supposed to be given to residents for their use, why would we want to lease it to the federal government? Better yet, if the property is taken by the federal government, will Tiyan landowners be compensated at fair market value or will the federal government use their powers of condemnation? In the past, the feds have taken land without compensation or input from residents, so why would it change?
Lastly, the Department of Defense will be constructing a deep-draft wharf to support aircraft carrier personnel. Projections contained in the DEIS show 63 aircraft carrier visits per year at 21 days of less per visit.
That's an additional 5600 military personnel on Guam every time a CSG anchors down at Apra Harbor. These 5600 military personnel will be granted liberty to see the sights and shores around the island, but who will be protecting local residents from military personnel when they are out and about? I don't think the Navy has enough Shore patrol officers to handle 5600 military personnel on the streets of Guam during liberty. In order to support the aircraft carrier, shore side infrastructure must be upgraded. That means, power, water, wastewater infrastructure will be upgraded, but who will pay for it? GovGuam, DOD, DON? I'm not so sure considering there have not been any guarantees from the federal government regarding cost sharing measures for infrastructure upgrades directly related to the military buildup.
Now that the DEIS is open for comment, all residents should look into it and be prepared to ask for guarantees from the federal government. We know what's about to happen, but we don't know how those affected will be compensated or if there will be any compensation from the federal government at all.
Guam needs guarantees that come with matching federal dollars for every dollar our local government spends. I personally believe that the federal government should fund construction of Haul roads, power and water infrastructure and building new schools because this massive buildup will impact all services provided by our local government. After all they are visitors on our island, Guam is our home and if the feds are going to change our way of life they should foot the bill.
The views and opinions expressed on KUAM Columns do not reflect those of Pacific Telestations, Inc. or its advertisers
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Sea turtles in peril
Sea turtles in peril
Friday, 27 November 2009 04:04 by Jennifer Naylor Gesick | Variety News Staff
THE Navy is still doing a marine resources biological assessment to address the potential affects of the proposed creation of a new wharf at Polaris Point to house an aircraft carrier on threatened and endangered species, according to the draft environmental impact statement.
There are three special status species associated with Apra Harbor. The green sea turtle is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, the Hawksbill sea turtle listed as endangered and the Spinner dolphin which is protected under the Endangered Marine Mammal Protection Act.
The Navy expects the potential impacts to sea turtles to be "temporary disruption of normal behavior patterns (swimming, resting or foraging behaviors at Sasa Bay and Big Blue Reef)," states the study.
The temporary activities include dredging for the wharf and turning basin anticipated to last four to 78 months. The entire dredging process is expected to last eight to 18 months, but the Navy does not anticipate work to widen and deepen the existing channels to affect sea turtles.
Pile-driving and wharf construction is expected to last from six to 18 months with a total of 3.5 year duration to be estimated for all in-water construction activities. The draft study does expect the sea turtle nesting activities to be impacted by the lights from the barges used for dredging activities.
The work is expected to go on 24 hours per day for up to 18 months. Sea Turtles have been observed nesting during all months of the year on Guam with peak activity from April to July. Dangkolo, Dikiki and Kilo Wharf are the most active locations. "In general sea turtles nest and hatch at night.
They use natural light cues to orient toward the ocean. However, bright lights from the dredging platforms may confuse nesting turtles and hatchlings and result in them orienting away from the ocean," says the statement. The Navy promises that the final impact study will contain a revised sea turtle impact analysis based on ongoing and recent past studies of potential noise exposures to sea turtles and other marine species from pile driving actions.
Friday, 27 November 2009 04:04 by Jennifer Naylor Gesick | Variety News Staff
THE Navy is still doing a marine resources biological assessment to address the potential affects of the proposed creation of a new wharf at Polaris Point to house an aircraft carrier on threatened and endangered species, according to the draft environmental impact statement.
There are three special status species associated with Apra Harbor. The green sea turtle is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, the Hawksbill sea turtle listed as endangered and the Spinner dolphin which is protected under the Endangered Marine Mammal Protection Act.
The Navy expects the potential impacts to sea turtles to be "temporary disruption of normal behavior patterns (swimming, resting or foraging behaviors at Sasa Bay and Big Blue Reef)," states the study.
The temporary activities include dredging for the wharf and turning basin anticipated to last four to 78 months. The entire dredging process is expected to last eight to 18 months, but the Navy does not anticipate work to widen and deepen the existing channels to affect sea turtles.
Pile-driving and wharf construction is expected to last from six to 18 months with a total of 3.5 year duration to be estimated for all in-water construction activities. The draft study does expect the sea turtle nesting activities to be impacted by the lights from the barges used for dredging activities.
The work is expected to go on 24 hours per day for up to 18 months. Sea Turtles have been observed nesting during all months of the year on Guam with peak activity from April to July. Dangkolo, Dikiki and Kilo Wharf are the most active locations. "In general sea turtles nest and hatch at night.
They use natural light cues to orient toward the ocean. However, bright lights from the dredging platforms may confuse nesting turtles and hatchlings and result in them orienting away from the ocean," says the statement. The Navy promises that the final impact study will contain a revised sea turtle impact analysis based on ongoing and recent past studies of potential noise exposures to sea turtles and other marine species from pile driving actions.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Consequences of military building challenged
Consequences of military building challenged
Posted: Nov 24, 2009 5:07 PM
Updated: Nov 24, 2009 6:41 PM
by Heather Hauswirth
The Defense Department's plans to build a deep draft wharf that can support a transient nuclear powered aircraft carrier inside of Apra Harbor may be considered a critical component of the buildup, but the construction of such berthing won't come without some consequences on the island's ecosystem.
"Apra Harbor is unique in the Pacific as being both a commercial port as well as a military port and a recreational port and it has some very high coral cover, pretty diverse habitats and the concern our agency has is the dredging may impact some of the habitats in the harbor in a negative way," explained Brent Tibbatts, Department of Agriculture of biologist.
There's just no getting around it, as Tibbatts says his team is looking at the costs associated with building a pier for an aircraft carrier at Apra Harbor. Both the Ship Repair Facility and Polaris Point are slated as the most suitable options for the wharf. Dredging is noted as an essential method for loosening material from the seafloor to the water surface in order to accommodate the carrier
He said, "The dredging will physically damage them (the coral reef), it will be removing some coral. Also concerns are that sediments stirred up from the dredging can smother coral or smother sponges or smother other organisms and disturb the habitat for those organisms as well as other things that live in them - fish, other animals that live on the reef."
President of the Guam Fisherman's Co-Op Manny Duenas added his concerns over the impact of dredging, but adds his concerns also relate to plans not yet decided by the DoD on how to dispose of the dredge material. "The reef fish go to the ocean and they live off the ocean's nutrients and if you dump a million cubic yards a year, it's 330 daily events that will happen in a given year of having dredge material out there," said Duenas. "Like I said, a million cubic yards that is equivalent to about 50,000 dump trucks to accommodate this new carrier dredge area in Apra Harbor."
Randel Sablan, Assistant Environmental Director for JGPO in Guam, says DoD has looked at both the short- and long-term impacts of dredging. "Those areas where you are doing the dredging will have an affect on those," he said, "taking out those resources, but then there's turbidity and sedimentation concerns and those are indirect and may affect resources nearby."
But Sablan says that strict protocols are in place when it comes to dredging and its impact on sea life. The way dredging proceeds is typically it is going to disturb the environment aside from actually taking the coral, the fish and the turtles and other sea life that can swim in that area will typically move away from the construction zone so you don't really have to anything except watch out for them.
Posted: Nov 24, 2009 5:07 PM
Updated: Nov 24, 2009 6:41 PM
by Heather Hauswirth
The Defense Department's plans to build a deep draft wharf that can support a transient nuclear powered aircraft carrier inside of Apra Harbor may be considered a critical component of the buildup, but the construction of such berthing won't come without some consequences on the island's ecosystem.
"Apra Harbor is unique in the Pacific as being both a commercial port as well as a military port and a recreational port and it has some very high coral cover, pretty diverse habitats and the concern our agency has is the dredging may impact some of the habitats in the harbor in a negative way," explained Brent Tibbatts, Department of Agriculture of biologist.
There's just no getting around it, as Tibbatts says his team is looking at the costs associated with building a pier for an aircraft carrier at Apra Harbor. Both the Ship Repair Facility and Polaris Point are slated as the most suitable options for the wharf. Dredging is noted as an essential method for loosening material from the seafloor to the water surface in order to accommodate the carrier
He said, "The dredging will physically damage them (the coral reef), it will be removing some coral. Also concerns are that sediments stirred up from the dredging can smother coral or smother sponges or smother other organisms and disturb the habitat for those organisms as well as other things that live in them - fish, other animals that live on the reef."
President of the Guam Fisherman's Co-Op Manny Duenas added his concerns over the impact of dredging, but adds his concerns also relate to plans not yet decided by the DoD on how to dispose of the dredge material. "The reef fish go to the ocean and they live off the ocean's nutrients and if you dump a million cubic yards a year, it's 330 daily events that will happen in a given year of having dredge material out there," said Duenas. "Like I said, a million cubic yards that is equivalent to about 50,000 dump trucks to accommodate this new carrier dredge area in Apra Harbor."
Randel Sablan, Assistant Environmental Director for JGPO in Guam, says DoD has looked at both the short- and long-term impacts of dredging. "Those areas where you are doing the dredging will have an affect on those," he said, "taking out those resources, but then there's turbidity and sedimentation concerns and those are indirect and may affect resources nearby."
But Sablan says that strict protocols are in place when it comes to dredging and its impact on sea life. The way dredging proceeds is typically it is going to disturb the environment aside from actually taking the coral, the fish and the turtles and other sea life that can swim in that area will typically move away from the construction zone so you don't really have to anything except watch out for them.
Friday, January 11, 2008
Big Navy Wharf Expanded
Big Navy wharf expanded greatly
by Clynt Ridgell, KUAM News
Friday, January 11, 2008
A ribbon cutting ceremony was held this morning commemorating the completion of upgrades to Bravo Wharf on Naval Base Guam. The completed project increases the base's capability and flexibility to host a broader range of naval vessels to include the U.S.S. Ohio. Construction work at alpha work is expected to be completed this summer.
The entire project for both wharfs totals nearly $51 million.
by Clynt Ridgell, KUAM News
Friday, January 11, 2008
A ribbon cutting ceremony was held this morning commemorating the completion of upgrades to Bravo Wharf on Naval Base Guam. The completed project increases the base's capability and flexibility to host a broader range of naval vessels to include the U.S.S. Ohio. Construction work at alpha work is expected to be completed this summer.
The entire project for both wharfs totals nearly $51 million.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)