The Army has disclosed that it intends to complete an environmental impact statement for the Multi-Purpose Range Complex at the Pohakuloa Training Area. Under terms of the settlement of a lawsuit filed a decade ago, the facility, constructed in the Kipuka `Alala area of PTA at a cost of upwards of $30 million, may not be used until the Army completes the EIS.
According to Col. James T. Hirai, commander of the U.S. Army Garrison, Hawai`i, “The Army has decided to pursue completion of the Environmental Impact Statement for the use of the MPRC. The EIS will examine the Army’s preferred alternative of using the MPRC area as a compensation area to mitigate the effects of training and other activities conducted elsewhere at PTA.” Hirai made the announcement in a letter March 9 to Paul Achitoff of the Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund. The letter responded to Achitoff’s proposal to resolve the outstanding issues of the settlement of a lawsuit filed by the late botanist Lani Stemmermann.
Stemmermann filed her lawsuit in 1989, attempting to stop construction of the 1,500-acre range complex until after the Army had completed thorough studies of plant life in the area. By the time a settlement was reached in September 1990, the Army had completed nearly all of the work on the MPRC.
That work consists of an access road and two additional roads inside the complex boundary, target arrays, and an administration area. Specific features include a control tower and water tower, storage building and restrooms, 18 miles of power lines, 495 power poles strung with 12 kV line, a utility corridor, vaults and wire boxes, Moving Armor Targets (MATS), Stationary Personnel Targets, and so-called “softened” sites, which have been graded, cleared of vegetation, and covered with gravel or cinder.
Under terms of the settlement, the Army was presented with several options. If it desired to use the MPRC, it had first to complete an EIS. That EIS had to include a consideration of the “no-use” or “no-action” alternative — that is, it had to consider use of the range complex “for purposes other than a live-fire training range, for example, a Natural Area Reserve.” The settlement language goes on to say: “In the event that the ‘no use’ or ‘no action’ alternative is adopted, the Army shall, to the extent feasible, agree to undertake site restoration for the purpose of permitting the area to revert to its natural state.”
After reaching the settlement, the Army hired consultants to prepare a more complete record of plants at Kipuka `Alala. Preliminary surveys found 13 threatened and endangered species of plants at PTA, up to five species of endangered birds, the endangered hoary bat, Hawai`i’s only native land mammal, and native invertebrates too numerous to list here.
At first, the Army planned to have the EIS completed by 1994. By late 1995, however, the Army was reported to have “given up” hope of ever using the facility.
An Effort to Bring Closure
In 1997, Earthjustice, representing Stemmermann’s estate, approached the Army to discuss bringing resolution to the settlement. In September 1997, the Army proposed limited use of the MPRC for training that would not involve live fire. Among proposed activities were artillery raids in which CH-46 helicopters would slingload howitzers and personnel into the area. Once inside the MPRC, the howitzers would be fired into the impact area. Such exercises would last three to four days and would occur about six times a year. Other activities included air assaults of helicopters ferrying troops (up to platoon strength) in and around MPRC; road marches and blank-fire mock attacks on the building complex; and simulated warfare between companies using buildings as props and the water tank as a sniper platform, and involving construction of concertina-wire obstacles.
Earthjustice rejected this proposal in October 1997. “We read the Army’s plans for the MPRC as contemplating its use for something other than as a live-fire training range. It appears that the Army does not intend to use the mobile target range at all. We do not read the Stipulation [the settlement agreement] as permitting the Army to eliminate its obligation to restore the site merely by carrying on some form of training activity in or around the MPRC, or even use of the area as a staging area from which artillery rounds may be fired out of the MPRC,” wrote Achitoff in a letter to Hirai dated October 15. “Consequently, restoration to allow the site to revert to its natural state is required by the Stipulation.”
In addition, the Army had claimed that the area was in fact meeting its obligation to restore the site through ongoing weed-control measures and maintenance of existing structures. In response, Achitoff wrote: “We do not view any of the measures described … as constituting restoration to the site’s natural state. Nor can we agree that the passage of time alone constitutes site restoration as contemplated by the Stipulation. The construction that was done … remains intact, and the areas where that work was done have not been, and will not be, restored by the passage of time alone. The Stipulation contemplates that, if the Army does not intend to use those structures for live-fire training the area must be restored to its natural, pre-construction state.”
The Army responded with a request to meet with Earthjustice representatives face to face, in a negotiating session — and seven months later, in June 1998, the meeting finally took place.
For the meeting, the Army had prepared a list of proposed and ongoing restoration and resource management actions in the Kipuka `Alala area. This area, the Army said, would be “one of the primary fenced areas that will be subject of intensive ecosystem management, largely as mitigation for effects of training activities elsewhere on PTA.” Among other things, the Army proposed leaving the control tower in place for “wildlife displays” and as a “vantage point for fire-fighting control.” Most of the remaining buildings also would be kept to support researchers and maintenance crews. Roads would be maintained, and an old jeep trail, known as the Old Bobcat Road, would be refurbished “for hunter access and resource management access.” Fencing of small areas with populations of the critically endangered plant Silene lanceolata would occur (one had already been enclosed; another was planned).
Among projects planned for the MPRC area was installation of a water tank that “eventually will provide irrigation water for outplanting of rare plants.” (For more on this, see “Army Backs Off Plans to Irrigate Rare Plants at Pohakuloa Training Area” in this issue of Environment Hawai`i.)
Counter-Proposal
Once more, Earthjustice rejected the Army’s plans. In a recap of the negotiating session, Achitoff wrote, “After discussing each of the 18 resource management actions with the Army at the meeting, it was apparent that all of the actions were either completed or ongoing, or that they would likely be implemented in the near future, regardless of the Stipulation, because they were part of other programs at PTA, such as the Army Ecosystem Management Program or proposed Saddle Road realignment.”
The meeting ended with Earthjustice agreeing to prepare a counter-offer.
In a letter dated September 4, 1998, Achitoff provided the Army with the elements of Earthjustice’s proposed restoration for the MPRC area. Contrary to the settlement agreement, Achitoff wrote, the Army apparently elected the “no action alternative” “without proposing to undertake either the required site restoration or even any site restoration actions in addition to what is already taking place at PTA.”
The Earthjustice counter-proposal called for the Army to retain the control tower, storage buildings, and existing access roads. But the water tower would have to go, unless it could be shown to be needed for fire-fighting. The power lines, too, would have to be dismantled, as would the buried power corridor and all wiring systems. The network of roads for training within the MPRC would be abandoned and replanted after restoration work was complete. “Softened” sites would have to be filled, leveled, and restored and replanted in native species from the area. Trenches would have to be filled and replanted.
In exchange for the Army keeping these improvements, Achitoff proposed, the Army would build and maintain a fence around the southwestern portions of PTA large enough to allow species conservation. On the northwestern boundary of PTA, the Army would construct a barrier fence. Inside the fenced area, all ungulates would be removed.
For six months, Achitoff’s proposal went unanswered. Finally, on March 9, 1999, Commander Hirai sent three short paragraphs to Achitoff, announcing the Army’s intention to use the MPRC “as a compensation area” to mitigate effects of activities elsewhere at Pohakuloa. Many of the studies of flora, fauna, and cultural resources to be included in the EIS have already been completed, but, according to Scott Henderson, completing the document will still cost the Army at least an additional $200,000.
— Patricia Tummons
Volume 9, Number 11 May 1999
Leave a Reply