Raleigh News & Observer
9.8.05
Navy can resume landing field work
Appeals court finds site study lacking
Jerry Allegood
A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that the Navy did not adequately study the possible environmental harm from a proposed jet landing field in Eastern North Carolina -- but said preliminary work there could continue.
The ruling by a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., was encouraging both to the Navy and to those who oppose putting the landing field on 30,000 acres in Washington and Beaufort counties. Those counties and three conservation groups say the field's operations would threaten wildlife and the economy.
The Navy says it needs a place for jets to practice carrier landings because development near its field in Chesapeake, Va., limits realistic training. It wants to build the facility -- called an outlying landing field -- near Plymouth. Jets based elsewhere would make at least 31,000 flights there a year.
On Wednesday, the appeals court upheld a decision by U.S. District Judge Terrence Boyle that the Navy had not taken a "hard look" at the environmental consequences of the airfield as required by federal law. The judges said the Navy should do more studies on the possible effects on Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge, on waterfowl that winter in the area and on the hazards of collisions between large birds and jet aircraft.
The Navy's original study resulted in "the far from self-evident conclusion that repetitive take-offs and landings of advanced fighter aircraft near mass gatherings of waterfowl will have only the most minor impacts upon them," the ruling said. "Maybe so, but this needs to be explained."
The judges said the Navy and not the courts should determine whether a landing field is needed. And they returned the case to Boyle to modify his order that stopped all work on the project. The appeals court said more studies, design work and acquisition of land from willing sellers could continue.
Ted Brown, a Navy spokesman in Norfolk, Va., said Navy officials were pleased that the appeals court allowed work to continue "toward the realization of this critically needed national security asset."
The $186 million airfield would be used by jets based 50 miles away at Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station at Havelock and 72 miles away at Oceana Naval Air Station in Virginia Beach. Opponents note that the site is also five miles from the national wildlife refuge, where hundreds of thousands of swans and geese take off and land during the winter.
Audubon North Carolina, Defenders of Wildlife and the N.C. Wildlife Federation contended that roaring jets practicing touch-and-go landings would disrupt waterfowl and could hit birds large enough to cause the aircraft to crash.
Derb Carter, a lawyer for the Southern Environmental Law Center in Chapel Hill, which represented the organizations, said he hoped the ruling would encourage the Navy to reconsider the location. He said he was disappointed that the Navy wants to spend more money on a project that faces substantial obstacles.
Carter noted that a federal commission considering the realignment and closure of military bases has determined that Oceana might have to be closed because of encroaching development. If the aircraft and the personnel who fly and maintain them are moved to Florida, as has been suggested, he said, the training field near Plymouth would not be needed.
"It would seem to be imprudent to spend another dime on the OLF until a decision is made on whether Oceana will remain open," he said.
The Navy has bought or condemned more than 2,000 acres for the field at a cost opponents peg at $6.4 million. Plans call for buying about 50 square miles of farms, many of which have been operated by the same families for a century or more.
