Citizens For Oversight of Navy Ocean Disposal Operations CONDO
Citizens Oversight of Navy Ocean Disposal Operations (CONDO) came together in 2010 as an information-sharing association of the Agriculture Defense Coalition, Citizens Opposed to Weaponizing the Oregon Coast, and coastal residents of California, Oregon, Washington, Alaska, and Idaho. Their common concern was the toxic legacy accumulating from the U.S. Navy's ever-expanding weapons testing and training in coastal waters from California to Alaska.
CONDO Contact Information: E-Mail info@californiaskykwatch.com
CONDO collects and distributes information on Navy-generated pollution of marine ecosystems, the Navy's continuing expansion plans, and the escalating erosion of Navy integrity and competence. A current oversight project examines the Navy's explosive ordnance disposal and hazardous material disposal practices at sea in Pacific waters.
Deja Vu Again and Again: Navy Weapons Tests Metastasize
by Carol Van Strum
Staff writer for Planet Waves, and contributor to CONDO
Four years ago, the U.S. Navy issued its final NWTRC Environmental Impact Statement for weapons testing and training along and offshore of the entire Pacific Northwest from the Canadian border, to all of Washington and Oregon, and northern California, including parts of Idaho. The final EIS/OEIS included three volumes, containing thousands of pages. Volume III was for public comments, well-prepared, substantive comments, a few answered by dismissive and insulting Navy responses, and most answered simply, "Duly noted."
http://www.agriculturedefensecoalition.org/sites/default/files/file/us_n..., other volumes are listed below.
How duly the Navy noted all those comments is sorely evident in the Navy's NWTt Draft 2014 Environmental Impact Statement containing more of the same bombing, gunnery, explosives, and sonar testing and training in the same area, now extended all the way to Alaska (SEE LINK BELOW). For example, many 2010 commenters pointed out the Navy's egregious refusal to avoid disturbing marine reserves along the Oregon and California coasts. The 2014 EIS repeats the same insult to all the care and planning devoted to marine reserves, bluntly asserting its right to bomb, shoot, explode, and zap with sonar and electromagnetic impulses every living thing in these sanctuaries.
So much for the Navy's commitment to environmental stewardship!
Similarly, in 2010, despite many commenters pointing out the absurdity and illegality of defining a “No Action” alternative as a continuance of sixty years of previous actions, the Navy insisted on doing so, thereby rendering the entire EIS a travesty. For example, in comparing its three alternative actions, all of the Navy's “No Action” data were for a single year rather than for the 60+ years that comprise the Navy's definition of “No Action.” The Navy thus reduced and concealed the true baseline impacts of its “No Action” alternative, skewing all of its comparisons 60-fold. By the Navy's own definition, any comparison of Alternatives 1 and 2 to the “No Action” alternative should have added each annual amount to a 60-year-total for the “No Action” alternative as defined by the Navy.
Instead of remedying that falsity, the Navy's 2014 NWTT EIS incorporates it as previously approved -- without saying, of course, who approved it! For some specific issues raised by 2010 commenters, such as the question of the cumulative effects of some 60 years of depleted uranium use in the “No Action” alternative, the Navy has simply omitted all mention of depleted uranium in its 2014 EIS (instead of repeating its previous 2010 reliance on thoroughly discredited, unpublished, non-peer-reviewed research [e.g., pp. G-288-G-289]).
In 2010, blatant notice and comment failures were repeatedly answered by simply declaring with no substantiation that the Navy complied with NEPA, at the same time often citing “public notification budget” considerations for notification failures (see e.g., pp. G-94 (twice), G-95, G-96, G-127, G-176, G-184, G-200, G-201, G-228, G-229, G-236, G-247, G-305). The Navy compounded its notice failures by repeating the same fiasco with the final EIS, hiding notice in an EPA Federal Register notice, sending only a single copy for the entire state of Oregon to a library hundreds of miles from many affected coastal communities, and having its web site crash or be inaccessible during the comment period.
Repeating ad infinitum that the Navy complied with NEPA does not make it so, and with typical obfuscation, the Navy has repeated the same failures in 2014, sending out its draft EIS on compact disks with no search function, failing to put even a rudimentary index in its hard copy, sending hard copies only to a few libraries remote from most of the affected coastlines, refusing to send hard copies to folks without computers on grounds it is too expensive.
The Navy ignored or dismissed many 2010 commenters' substantive issues, such as the DOI recommendation that all alternatives include measures for retrieval of debris and equipment,and also include analysis of the effects of toxics released into the water by uncollected debris, to which the Navy responded by saying it would be “impractical, if not impossible to collect the thousands of expended items...,” and that requiring collection of them would therefore be unreasonable. (G-38) To the surprise of no one, the 2014 NWTt draft EIS does not address this issue.
In response to numerous comments about hazardous materials, the Navy added some scattered information to the final 2010 EIS about toxicity and Navy waste disposal practices, including its practice of throwing heavy metals, solvents, cyanide, and other toxics overboard (see, e.g., p.3.3-17) . Predictably, the Navy concluded upon no basis whatsoever that there would be no significant impact from such practices, and nowhere mentioned the cumulative impact of 60 years of such wanton dumping encompassed by the “No Action” alternative. Absent any official oversight of Navy disposal practices, citizen oversight, via CONDO, is imperative.
Having approved of its own legerdemain back in 2010, the Navy doesn't even include a hazardous materials disposal section in its 2014 NWTT draft EIS, and has so far refused to provide such information, or information about explosive weapons disposal, under the Freedom of Information Act.
The above are just a few of the shortcomings (a kinder, gentler way to say total lies and failures) repeated and multiplied in the Navy's 2014 NWTT draft EIS, which is poorly organized, badly written, and replete with self-referrals and disinformation. It couldn't be worse if they tried.
Thanks to the efforts of county supervisors and commissioners in Oregon and California, as well as some outraged citizens, the Navy has extended the comment period for its current travesty to April 15, 2014. Take some time to look at it and comment, and above all, to raise the issues with legislators and the media. End
U.S. Navy Escalates Warfare Testing in the Pacific, Atlantic & Gulf of Mexico Escalates in 2013 & 2014.
Public Comment Due by April 15, 2014
"Shock & Awe" Bomb Blasts, Sonar use, Missile Exercises, Live-Fire Weapons Testing, Lasers, Electromagnetic
Weapons, and Experimental Weapons Testing all negatively impact marine life and our oceans.
Public Comment Due by April 15, 2014, on U.S. Navy NWTT Website for Northern California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho & Alaska. Read the Northwest Training & Testing EIS/OEIS Draft EIS/OEIS on the U.S. Navy Website & Make Your Public Comments or Ask Questions:
U.S. Navy Website: http://nwtteis.com/
Call Your Elected Officials Today in Washington D.C. Toll Free: (1866) 220-0044
1) Request a 30 to 60 Day Extension of Time for Public Comment (U.S. Navy NWTT Draft EIS/OEIS)
2) Contact U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer Requesting Congressional Hearings to Protect Our National Marine Sanctuaries, Biologically Sensitive Areas, Marine Reserves, Coral Reefs & Other Coastal Regions from "Shock & Awe" Navy Warfare Testing.
3) The U.S. Navy applied for two permits to “take” marine mammals in the NWTT Range Complex which includes Northern California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho & California. The U.S. Navy applications to NOAA was issued on December 18, 2014, one month before the Navy NWTT Draft EIS/OEIS was available for public comment on January 18, 2014.
A. The public comment period issued by NOAA on these two applications (300 pages in length), closed on February 28, 2014, and did not give time for public comment due to the length of the Navy applications to NOAA and the Navy Draft EIS (Approximately 2,000 Pages in Length).
B. We formally request that the NOAA deadline for Public Comment be reopened and that the U.S. Navy Draft EIS/OEIS public comment period be extended for 30 to 60 days. Both the Navy Applications to NOAA and the NWTT Draft EIS are based on the information in both documents. Thus, the public comment periods should be open at the same time to give the public time to comment under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
C. We are aware that the U.S. Navy granted a very brief extension of the public comment period on the NWTT Draft EIS/OEIS. However, without the public comment being opened on the Navy applications to NOAA, public comment is restricted because the two applications are based on the NWTT Draft EIS/OEIS. Both public comment periods should be open at the same time due to the extensive information in each these documents.
U.S. Navy Requests for Letters of Authorization to “Take” marine mammals listed by application date and range location.
U.S. Navy Application – December 18, 2013:
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/permits/navy_nwtt_loa_application2014.pdf
Public Comment Was Closed on February 28, 2014. Please join us in working to reopen this public comment period.
U.S. Federal Register Notice for & E-Mail (also mail address), for Public Comment:
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/01/29/2014-01724/takes-of-...
217 7 2014 U.S. Navy NWTT Warfare Training Testing Range Map February 28 2014 Northern CA Oregon Washington Idaho Alaska.pdf
U.S. NAVY TWO APPLICATIONS TO NOAA TO "TAKE" OR HARM MARINE MAMMALS IN NWTT RANGE:
U.S. NAVY MPA OF THE NWTT RANGE COMPLEX:
THE U.S. NAVY HAS MORE THAN TWELVE COASTAL WARFARE TESTING OPERATING RANGES:
U.S. NAVY MITIGATION MEASURES TO PROTECT MARINE MAMMALS EFFECTIVE ONLY 9% OF THE TIME:
271A 12 2012 U.S. NAVY CARTOON No Visual Sightings Bombs Away Sonarize our Oceans.pdf
271A 9 2012 U.S. NAVY VS NATURE POSTCARD.pdf
IMPORTANT LETTERS WRITTEN BY U.S. ELECTED OFFICIALS:
U.S. NAVY TWO APPLICATIONS TO "TAKE" OR HARM MARINE MAMMALS & OTHER ACTIONS:
ADDITIONAL WEST COAST INFORMATION:
271C 13 2008 Oregon State Police Marine Marker Safety Bulletin Issue Date December 8 2010.pdf
U.S. NAVY DRAFT NWTT EIS/OEIS (NORTHERN CA, OREGON, WASHINGTON, IDAHO & ALASKA):
271C 7 2014 U.S. Navy Draft NWTT EIS OEIS Acronyms And Abbreviations January 2014.pdf
271C 7 2014 U.S. Navy Draft NWTT EIS OEIS Executive Summary January 2014.pdf
271C 7 2014 U.S. Navy Draft NWTT EIS OEIS Table of Contents January 2014.pdf
271C 7 2014 U.S. Navy Draft NWTT EIS OEIS Volume II January 2014.pdf
271C 7 2014 U.S. Navy Draft NWTT EIS OEIS Volume I January 2014.pdf
U.S. NAVY WEST COAST INFORMATION:
U.S. NAVY FINAL NWTRC INFORMATION (Current Activities in new NWTT Range):
271DL 11 2010 Marin County Board of Supervisors Letter to U.S. Navy NWTRC FEIS October 12 2010.pdf
271DL 11 2010 Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Agenda October 19 2010 U.S. Navy on Agenda.pdf
271DL 11 2010 Sinkyone Letter to President Obama December 16 2010 U.S. Navy NWTRC.pdf
271DL 11 2010 Sinkyone Letter to U.S. Navy October 24 2010 NWTRC FEIS.pdf
271DL 11 2010 U.S. Congressman Thompson Letter to the U.S. Navy October 8 2010 Important Letter.pdf
271DL 12 2009 Press Release by Oregon Senators Question Navy Warfare Program April 9 2009.pdf
271DL 12 2009 U.S. Senator Boxer Letter to U.S. Navy June 17 2009 on U.S. Navy NWTRC.pdf
271DN 9 2013 NOAA NMFS LOA for U.S. Navy NWTRC November 12 2013 for Taking Marine Mammals.pdf
U.S. NAVY FINAL NWTRC OES/OEIS & ROD (Record of Decision) Detailing Current Warfare Activities in the NWTT Range at this time:
U.S. NAVY WEAPONS SYSTEMS & EXPERIMENTAL WEAPONS BEING TESTED IN ALMOST ALL WARFARE TESTING RANGES:
271E 10 2011 U.S. Department of Defense F 35 Joint Strike Fight Executive Summary 2011 F 35 JSF.pdf
271E 10 2011 U.S. Is Prepping New Ship Killing Missiles January 21 2011 Wired News.pdf
271E 10 2011 U.S. Navy Electronics+Electromagnetics NRL 2011.pdf
271E 10 2011 U.S. Navy NRL Electronics+Electromagnetics Section Research Articles.pdf
271E 18 2003 Electromagnetic Acoustic Propagation Experiment Abstract November 2003.pdf
271E 9 2012 U.S. Navy ONR Electromagnetic Railgun Fact Sheet Website April 9 2012.pdf
U.S. NAVY FINAL GULF OF MEXICO EIS/OIES:
271FG 10 2011 U.S. Navy Gulf of Mexico Final EIS OEIS Volume One March 20 2011 GOA.pdf
U.S. NAVY COASTAL COMMISSION ACTION WITH REGARD TO U.S. NAVY SONAR COASTAL ACTIVITIES:
U.S. GAO (GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING OFFICE) REPORTS:
271G 8 2013 U.S. GAO Report Explosive Ordnance Disposal EOD April 25 2013 GAO Report 13 385.pdf
271G 8 2013 U.S. GAO Report Explosive Ordnance Disposal EOD April 25 2013 GAO Summary 13 385.pdf
U.S. NAVY HAWAII / SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WARFARE TESTING RANGE:
SHIP STRIKES:
271I 17 2004 Large Whale ship Strike Database January 2004 U.S. Navy Ship Strike Record NOT Good.pdf
271I 8 2013 Speed Limit for Ships is Reduced to Protect Whales December 28 2013 AP+AJC News.pdf
U.S. NAVY GULF OF ALASKA WARFARE TESTING ROD (RECORD OF DECISION):
271J 10 2011 U.S. Navy Gulf of Alaska Record of Deccision May 11 2011 ROD.pdf
U.S. NAVY MARIANA ISLANDS WARFARE TESTING RANGE (PACIFIC):
LAWSUIT INFORMATION:
271L 12 2009 PEER+Wild Fish Conservancy vs U.S. Navy Lawsuit Summary Judgment May 5 2009.pdf
271L 14 2007 Whale Fears Silence U.S. Navy Sonar Until 2009 News.bbc.co.pdf
271L 7 2014 Environmentalists Sue Navy Over Sonar Use January 15 2014 APNews California Hawaii.pdf
271L 7 2014 NRDC vs NMFS Lawsuit January 27 2014.pdf
NEWS ARTICLES & MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION:
271M 11 2010 USA Today U.S. Navy Plans Could Affect More Marine Mammals August 5 2010 by Eisler.pdf
271M 7 2014 U.S. Navy Future Capabilities ONR Website January 5 2014.pdf
271M 8 2013 U.S. Code 201 10 U.S.C. 2358 Research+Development Projects Website October 19 2013.pdf
271M Nuremberg Code Directives for Human Experimentation Regulations+Ethical Guidelines.pdf
NOAA (National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration) & NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service) Information & Other Related Information:
271N 7 2014 NOAA Endangered & Threatened Marine Species Website.pdf
271N 7 2014 NOAA Incidental Take Authorizations Website February 2 2014 Complete List.pdf
271N 7 2014 NOAA National Marine Fisheries TAKE Authorizations Website March 20 2014.pdf
271N 7 2014 NOAA Pacific Salmonids Major Threats and Impacts Website.pdf
271N 7 2014 NOAA Sea Turtles Status January 2014 Website.pdf
271N 8 2013 Sockeye Salmon at Dire Historic Low on Canada Pacific Coast August 19 2013 ENE News.pdf
U.S. Navy Mitigation Measures to Protect Marine Mammals Effective Only 9% of the Time:
TOXIC CHEMICALS USED IN OCEAN & LAND AREAS (Note Radiation Issues):
271Q 16 2005 U.S. Used White Phosphorus in Iraq November 16 2005 BBC News 4440664.pdf
271Q 18 2003 U.S. to Use Depleted Uranium March 18 2003 BBVC News 2860759.pdf
271Q 8 2013 Oregon State Police Ocean Beach Safety Warning Marine Marker Findings October 7 2013.pdf
LASERS - U.S. Navy Warfare Testing (Note Acoustic Impacts of Lasers):
271R 10 2011 U.S. Navy NRL Acoustics 2011 Review.pdf
271R 12 2009 U.S. Navy UAV Lasers Warfare Technology Advancing Tests 2009.pdf
271R 21 2000 NASA News Spaceborne LASERS to Revolutionize Global Change Research January 10 2000.pdf
271R 8 2013 U.S. Navy Readies Laser Attack Weapon in 2014 April 9 2013 Space War News.pdf
271R 8 2013 U.S. Navy Shipboard Lasers Pass Early Tests April 8 2013 U.S. Navy Times.pdf
271R 8 2013 Watch a Futuristic Robot Ship Track Enemy Submarines January 16 2013 Tech News Daily.pdf
271R 9 2012 U.S. Navy History of Laser Weapon Research Storming Media Abstract January 2012.pdf
SONAR & SEISMIC AIRGUNS:
271S 10 2011 Air Anti Submarine Warfare Advanced Sonar July 7 2011 Report Global Security.org.pdf
271S 10 2011 Beaked Whales Respond to Simulated and Actual Navy Sonar Abstract 2011Tyack.pdf
271S 11 2010 Beached Dolphins Often Deaf Study Finds November 3 2010 PBS News.pdf
271S 11 2010 Whales Shout Over Noise Pollution Study LiveScience News July 7 2010.pdf
271S 7 2014 Research Links on Sonar & Sound Impacts on Marine Mammals 2011 2014 Navy Impacts.pdf
271S 8 2013 Blue Whales Respond to Simulated Mid Frequency Military Sonar Research March 13 2013.pdf
271S 8 2013 Military Sonar May Hurt Blue Whales July 3 2013 LiveScience.pdf
271S 8 2013 More Than Half of Stranded Bottlenose Dolphins May Be Deaf July 31 2013 LiveScience.pdf
271S 8 2013 U.S. Navy Awards Next Gen Radar Contract October 15 2013 to Raytheon.pdf
271S 8 2013 U.S. Navy SURTASS Terminology Website April 2 2013.pdf
271S 8 2013 Why the U.S. Navy Needs SURTASS LFA Website April 2 2013 http www.surtass lfa eis.pdf
271S 92012 New Study Ship Noise Stresses Whales Study LiveScience News February 7 2012.pdf
U.S. NAVY RADIATION ISSUES:
U.S. NAVY DRONES & OTHER AIRCRAFT:
271U 7 2014 Drone Crash Database February 17 2014 Website Drone Wars UK http dronewars.pdf
REEFS & COASTAL REGIONS:
271V 8 2013 Bow Cut from U.S. Navy Ship Lifted From Philippine Reef March 27 2013 CNN News.pdf
OCEAN MARINE LIFE
271W 7 2014 Pacific Coast Starfish Dying in Record Numbers January 2014 Victoria News.pdf
271W 8 2013 Chinook Salmon Stocks A King Without its Crown December 29 2013 Juneau Empire News.pdf
271W 8 2013 The Starfish Are Dying No One Knows Why December 31 2013 USA Today West Coast.pdf
U.S. GOVERNMENT INFORMATION:
271X 7 2014 Military Radar Summit April 2014 Website.pdf
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
271 1 7 2014 U.S. Navy MAPS+At Sea Environmetnal Compliance Documents Website February 4 2014.pdf
*** The U.S. Navy Map below outlines the areas in which the U.S. Navy is now conducting warfare testing in the Pacific, Atlantic & Gulf of Mexico. There are more than twelve U.S. Navy coastal operating ranges in these areas. (The Navy Mariana Islands Range Complex in the Pacific is included in this list.) And each range complex, whether large or small, has permits from NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service to "take" or harm marine mammals.
Click here for a full size poster! (9.42MB)