Malu 'Aina

The silence of our elected officials and a critical media on the military intrusion into our communities is a disgrace.

 These Special Ops Military Assassination training throughout all of Hawaii (all Islands) is a massive military expansion and intrusion into our community without any county or state opposition.  It’s a disgrace. (See my press release below from 2019)

Jim

— Jim Albertini Malu ‘Aina Center For Non-violent Education & Action P.O. Box 489 Ola’a (Kurtistown) Hawai’i 96760 Phone 808-966-7622 Email ja@malu-aina.org Visit us on the web at www.malu-aina.org

PRESS RELEASE For immediate release Sat. Jan. 19, 2019

 

Re: State DLNR Needs to  Stop Military Special Ops Training on Hawaii Public Shorelines, Parks, etc.

further contact:

Jim Albertini, president Malu ‘Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action P.O. Box 489 Kurtistown, Hawaii 96760 Phone 808-966-7622 email ja@malu-aina.org visit us on the web at www.malu-aina.org sign up on our website to automatically receive our posts

                                         

Hundreds of military training missions are planned per year in public areas involving groups up to 46 people, with each training lasting between 4 and 96 hours. And this is why they want to do the training  —

Today, the US empire has 95% of the world’s foreign military bases, with personnel in more than 160 countries, many personnel conducting “Special Ops —  covert unconventional warfare with drones and assassination teams to maintain US economic global domination.  See http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/50951.htm

 The late author William Blum said: “American people are very much like the children of a Mafia boss who do not know what their father does for a living, and don’t want to know, but then wonder why someone just threw a firebomb through the living room window.”

Statement by Jim Albertini

“The Hawai’i State Department of Land & Natural Resources (DLNR) appears asleep.  The DLNR needs to stand up and act to protect public resources by stopping military Special Ops training on Hawai’i public shorelines, parks, etc. in public areas OUTSIDE of military bases on all islands   These Special Ops, including covert surveillance and assassination training involve the Navy, Army, Marines, and Air Force. Covert military Special Ops are a rapidly increasing part of US military policy worldwide.  This massive Military intrusion into our coastal nearshore waters, public shorelines and public spaces will irreversibly damage natural and cultural resources. These marine environments are crucial to sustaining Native Hawaiian cultural practices, fragile ecosystems supporting diverse species and fishing grounds used for generations.

“Hawai’i is already one of the most militarized places on the planet with over 100 military installations including nearly 25% of the island of Oahu and now the military wants to expand its warfare operations into coastal nearshore waters, shorelines, beaches, public parks, and inland non-federal land locations.  These crown and government lands and waters fall within the claimed jurisdiction of the State and belong to the public trust.  Therefore, DLNR has a responsibility to ensure the safe and responsible use of Hawai’i’s natural resources.  Many of the DLNR officials in charge of protecting Hawai’i’s natural resources that I’ve talked to were completely unaware of these planned military Special Ops and showed little or no interest in standing up to this military.

“A Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared to supposedly analyze the potential impacts of the Special Ops.  See it here Environmental Assessment Open for Public Review It made a Finding of No Significant Impacts (FONSI).  THE FINDING IS A LIE!  The deadline for public comments on the Draft EA was Jan. 7, 2019.  Who is the military kidding?  The Draft EA said there are hundreds of proposed trainings planned per year involving groups up to 46 people, with each training lasting between 4 and 96 hours. The training may involve air and submarine drones, boats, helicopters, etc. The Special Ops EA has three action options: a preferred option for Special Ops training, a 2nd modestly scaled down version option, and instead of a NO Action third option, it notes continued Special Ops training as currently taking place without explaining where, how many, and the kinds of ongoing Special Ops training.”

“A specific point to invalidate the Draft EA and require a full EIS is that the draft EA is incomplete and does not cover all the Special Ops that have been planned.  I will cite one specific case below involving armed Navy Special Ops planned for Mauna Kea Recreation Area and the slopes of Mauna Kea that was not included in the Draft EA Special Ops.  Given this fact, there is reason to believe there may be additional Special Ops also planned for other areas that were also not included in the draft EA Special Ops.  Here is the link for the Navy Special Op planned for Mauna Kea Recreational Area.  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BctJ9aw2rcJJQG3YNsM9SrqRGqWBnfiV/view?usp=sharing  This Mauna Kea Park Special Op according to press reports of Nov. 28, 2018  (Hawaii Tribune-Herald and West Hawaii Today front page articles) was cancelled due to community opposition.  But this was done after the Draft EA Special Ops was published.”

Here are some of the DLNR people I spoke with in person or by phone:

1. Shelly Habel, DLNR conservation & coastal lands 1-808-587-0377. When I explained my concern about the military Special Ops, Ms. Habel said “I was wasting her time.” She was completely unaware of the Military Special Ops EA and appeared not to care.
2. Gordon Heidt, DLNR Big island Land Division Manager 961-9590 was unaware of the Military Special Ops EA but read in the newspaper about Malu ‘Aina and others stopping Special Ops training at Mauna Kea park.
3. Jay Hakeyama, DLNR Forestry and wildlife Hilo office 974-4221  Unaware of Military Special Ops EA.  He referred me to Aquatics Division
4. Jordan Carter, DLNR Aquatics Resources Hilo office 961, 9530  Unaware of Military Special Ops EA, but appeared concerned and referred me to DLNR director’s office, Suzane Case on Oahu 1-808-587-0400
5. DLNR Director’s office 1-808 587-0400.  I called on the afternoon of 1/17/19.   After I explained my concern to the person who answered the phone, I asked to speak to the director or one of her staff. I was put on hold for 15 min. and then the same person said she would pass on my concerns.  When I asked the person with whom I was speaking for her name for my record, she refused to give it to me and hung up on me. All this on the very day of the 126th anniversary of the US illegal overthrow of the government of Queen Lili’uokalani and the Hawaiian Kingdom with the assistance of the U.S. military.
6. Chris Yuen, BLNR Board member from the Big island 963-6966  I’ve known Chris for decades and actually spoke to him on Thanksgiving day about the Special Ops then planned for Mauna Kea park.  In my phone call with Chris on1/17/19 I told him of my experience trying to get help from DLNR pushing back to the Military Special Ops without success or even knowledge by many DLNR people of the military special ops plans.  I gave him a link to my post on malu-aina.org website  http://malu-aina.org/?p=5820 for further info on the Military Special Ops and  he said he would look into it.
7. Sam Lemmo, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands Administrator 1-808-587-0377.  I emailed him a copy of my testimony to the Navy EA.  I called  on 1/17/19 and asked his secretary for Sam to return my call. Sam returned my call and left a brief message on Friday, Jan. 18th 3:07PM when I was at the Malu ‘Aina weekly peace vigil in downtown Hilo.

Jim Albertini, President Jan. 19, 2019

Malu ‘Aina Center For Non-violent Education & Action P.O. Box 489 Ola’a (Kurtistown) Hawai’i 96760 Phone 808-966-7622 Email ja@malu-aina.org Visit us on the web at www.malu-aina.org

— Jim Albertini Malu ‘Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action P.O. Box 489 Kurtistown, Hawaii 96760 Phone 808-966-7622 email ja@malu-aina.org visit us on the web at www.malu-aina.org sign up on our website to automatically receive our posts

On 6/4/21 5:25 AM, Michael Reimer wrote:

I thought you might like to see the pro forma response I received on my comments about the Navy use of Hawaii for stealth invasion practices engaging the civilian population.  This sure took a long time in coming.  Perhaps some of you have received similar responses.  As expected, the EA states no significant impact.  This response states: The activities are similar to those conducted by the general public. 

 Really?  Assassination practice?  The entire state is now a training area. 

 I converted this document to Word from the pdf format so I can include it as part of this email.  Some of the formatting is awkward but the substance is there.

Regards,  Mike Reimer

GeoMike5@att.net

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYCOMMANDERNAVY REGION HAWAII850 TICONDEROGA ST STE 110JBPHH, HAWAII 96860-51015000-45E N45April 12, 2021 Michael Reimer (GeoMike5@att.net)Dear Michael Reimer: SUBJECT: COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) FOR NAVAL SPECIAL OPERATIONS TRAINING IN THE STATE OF HAWAII Thank you for participating in the National Environmental Policy Act process. Your comment letter has been received and is included in Appendix C (Public Comments and Responses) of the Final EA. The Proposed Action is in accordance with the Naval Special Warfare Command (NSWC) meeting its Title 10 U.S. Code Section 167 mandate as discussed in Section 1.3 (Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action) in the Draft and Final EAs. The Proposed Action is needed to meet current training deficiencies and ultimately provide combat ready naval special operation forces. During the development of the alternatives, NSWC considered three training area screening factors (training, safety and logistics) when identifying an area that could support warm weather naval special operations training and satisfy the training requirements as described in Section 2.4 (Training Area Screening Factors). Following the review of the screening factors, it was determined that the training study area in the State of Hawaii fulfills all of the beginning/intermediate, warm weather maritime climate prior to advancing to more challenging (colder weather) environments. In addition to meeting the training requirements, the safety and logistical training area screening factors presented in Section 2.4 are also satisfied by training in the State of Hawaii. Thus, the State of Hawaii fully satisfies all three training area screening factors and is considered the only feasible warm weather maritime location for training naval special operations personnel. Military properties do not provide sufficient varied and diverse locations or environmental features to adequately prepare special operations personnel for the types of environments they may encounter on deployment. NSWC conducted an extensive search for sites within the training study area that would meet its training requirements and minimize or avoid impacts on the environment or public. As described in Chapter 2 (Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives) of the Draft and Final EAs, each site was specifically researched and evaluated for numerous factors, to include sites suitable for meeting training requirements considering, diversity, complexity and challenge, flexibility, potential impacts on the environment, accessibility, cultural and biological resource site conditions (i.e., scheduled public events or protected species considerations), as well as availability of a site at the time the training would be scheduled to occur. Having a varied selection of sites in an expansive area provides trainers with flexibility to select increasingly complex and challenging locations in order to meet training requirements.Additionally, a wider selection of training sites minimizes the potential for overuse of the areas. This also limits impacts on any one location and allows for maintaining the natural habitat. Training value can be degraded when the same activities are routinely conducted using the same sites. As specific training activities are scheduled, compatible sites within the training study area would be selected to support each training event. To sustain the highest level of training value and avoid trainee familiarity with specific sites, site selections are made to create the most challenges for the trainees and to be responsive to training needs. Finally, a wide array of training sites more readily allows NSWC to select sites with the goal of separating the military activity from the public, while still meeting its training 5000-45E N45April 12, 2021 objectives. Under the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 2) an individual training site may be used up to 10 events/year. However, not all sites within the training study area would be utilized over a 1-year period. NSWC does not anticipate disruptions to the community, local economy or the environment. The intent of the proposed training is to build trainees’ skills, experience, and confidence by challenging them in a location with dynamic weather, varied terrain, and warm-water conditions. As part of the rigorous training, the trainees learn skills needed to avoid detection along with the goal of leaving no trace of their presence during or after training activities. Proposed training would occur only on sites with the permission of landowners or managers (e.g., State Parks, private property owners, etc.). NSWC also coordinates with local police departments and law enforcement prior to conducting training activities. As discussed in Section 2.1.1 (Training Activities) of the Draft and Final EAs, all training activities would be non-invasive. NSWC would not build training devices or infrastructure at any site during the proposed training activities. The proposed training does not include the use of live-fire ammunition or explosive demolitions, bombing activities, off-road driving, digging, vegetation cutting or removal (with the exception of one federal property location), tree climbing, construction, building camp fires, or leaving human waste at any training site. The intent of naval special operations training activities is for trainees to remain undetected and to leave no trace of their presence during or after the training activity.Disturbances are expected to be short term and infrequent and any potential impacts would be minimal and short term based on the relatively low intensity, localized nature, and infrequent nature of the impacts, and brief duration of the activities. There is no active training operation for the public to see. The trainees learn skills needed to avoid detection. Support staff would be dressed as a member of the public and the support staff would only interact with the public if there was a chance the public may unintentionally discover trainees. Support staff would also visit a training site prior to a training event commencing to ensure there is minimal public in the area.There is no intent to utilize the public in any of the training events or scenarios. Support personnel include safety personnel who maintain safety buffers, occupy emergency response vehicles and provide medical support when necessary. During training events, support personnel are responsible for the safety and oversight of trainees participating in the activity. The support personnel continually evaluate the training scenario and employ standard operating procedures to ensure that training activities are isolated and remain safe (Section 2.1.3). In addition, Navy policy requires that training activities ensure the safety and health of personnel and the public (Public Health and Safety, Section 3.6.2). The purple area depicted on the maps in the Draft and Final EAs is a study area. Training would be conducted in selected coastal nearshore waters and selected shoreline and inland locations throughout the State of Hawaii; the training study area is larger than the actual area that would be used for the proposed training due to the training’s sensitivities and would be limited to smaller sites on federal land and on state and private lands that have the consent of property owners before training activity occurs. Areas on the Island of Hawaii outside of the training study area (purple area depicted on maps), such as Hawaii Volcano National Park, are not included as part of the training study area. Thus, no training is proposed outside of the training study area. Simulated building clearance training activities are not proposed on the Island of Hawaii.The Draft and Final EAs were prepared using the best available science and include over 240 references with specific citations to scientific studies that provide the basis for the statements and 5000-45E N45April 12, 2021 conclusions contained within the document. Chapter 3 (Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences) of the Draft and Final EAs presents an analysis of the potential direct and indirect effects of each alternative. Chapter 4 (Cumulative Impacts) of the Draft and Final EAs evaluates the impact on the environment that may result from the incremental impact of the action when added to the other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of which agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions. The environmental impacts from the training activities are expected to be minimal, short term, and temporary based on the (1) relatively low intensity of the impacts, (2) localized nature of the impacts, (3) infrequent nature of the impacts, and (4) brief duration of theactivities (see Table 2-4 of the Final EA). The activities are similar to those conducted by the generalpublic.The Navy assessed the potential effect of the proposed training on marine and terrestrial biological resources. As the analysis in the Draft and Final EAs shows, there would be no significant impacts on these resources. The Navy has consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for the Proposed Action, and the same conclusion was reached. Please refer to Section 3.3 (Biological Resources) for a full analysis of the Navy’s impacts on biological resources. Section 3.3 of the Final EA has also been revised to include discussion of marine sanctuaries, particularly the Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary. Correspondence regarding consultations with the USFWS and NMFS is presented in Appendix A (Agency Correspondence) of the Final EA. As described in the Draft and Final EAs in Section 3.3.3.2.2 (Marine Biological Resources), as a general practice, submersibles and small inflatable boats would be used during the training activities and would be used more on sandy areas, where fewer invertebrates are present and where damage to the vessels could be more readily avoided. Vessels would not be anchored or set down on coral, marine invertebrates, or juvenile fish. Trainees would avoid coral when conducting proposed training activities. The low numbers of trainees walking within intertidal areas would not generate any more turbidity (cloudiness or haziness) than wave action would generate and no discharges of any materials are to be made into the marine environment, thus water quality would not be affected. Proposed training activities would have minimal impacts on marine invertebrates because of the minimally invasive training activities and avoidance measures (e.g., timing of activities to avoid low tides and geographic restrictions on sensitive coral reef areas). Any disturbances from training activities would not be expected to cause long-term or permanent impairment to the surrounding benthic habitats because any damage would likely be very small and localized. The proposed training does not include the introduction of pollutants to the training study area and water quality is not expected to undergo a measurable change due to the Proposed Action.The Navy utilized the best available science to identify the cultural resources, including traditional cultural properties, in the training study area. Please refer to Section 3.4 (Cultural Resources) for a full analysis of historic properties, which are cultural resources that include prehistoric and historic districts, sites, buildings, structures, or objects included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places including properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to Native Hawaiian Organizations that meet the National Register Criteria. The Navy also consulted with the Hawaii State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), and 62 Native Hawaiian Organizations, historic partners, and the public. The Navy determined that the proposed undertaking for the NSWC to conduct land, maritime, and air-based training activities in the State of Hawaii will result in no historic properties affected in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The Hawaii SHPO has concurred with a Finding of No Adverse Effect and the Navy’s Section 106 requirements have been 5000-45E N45April 12, 2021 completed. Correspondence regarding the NHPA Section 106 consultation effort is presented in Appendix A (Agency Correspondence) of the Final EA. 5000-45E N45April 12, 2021 The Final EA has been revised to include discussion of fishing for both recreation and food in Section 3.2(Land Use – Recreation). Training activities would not interfere with public use of water areas for fishing for recreation or food. Training activities would not impact fish stocks and would not interfere with public use of water areas for fishing for food or recreation. Access to marine areas on non-federal and federal lands would not be changed. Training would be localized, infrequent, brief in duration, and consistent with the existing land use. Training would not restrict fishing access or activities within the training study area.As stated in Section 3.5 (Noise) of the Draft and Final EAs, training activities would generally occur away from residentially zoned areas and the operational conditions of land-based activities is to remain undetected and leave no trace of presence during or after the training. In addition, the operational conditions of aviation activities to maintain elevations above 2,000 feet except for short periods (below 500 feet for approximately 10 minutes) associated with proposed training under Alternative 2 (Preferred Alternative) avoids and minimizes noise and potential noise impacts. Disturbances are expected to be short term and infrequent and any impacts on points of interest are minimal and short term based on the (1)relatively low intensity of the impacts, (2) localized nature of the impacts, (3) infrequent nature of theimpacts, and (4) brief duration of the activities. Air-based training would not occur on the islands ofMaui, Lanai, Molokai, and Hawaii. Only unmanned aerial systems (UAS) would be used during air-based training on Kauai and only on federal property.Air quality is analyzed in Section 3.1 of the Draft and Final EAs and Air Quality Calculations are presented in Appendix B. Transportation vehicles, vessels, aircraft, and training equipment associated with proposed training activities would generate emissions; however, the emissions would not result in a significant change from the environmental baseline and would have negligible impacts on regional ambient air quality. In addition, the dispersive nature of the proposed activities would prevent pollutants from concentrating in a single location and would not result in a new major source of emissions that could cause the State of Hawaii to exceed National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The State of Hawaii is designated as being in attainment for all criteria pollutants and therefore does not require a conformity determination. Therefore, no significant impacts on air quality would occur with implementation of Alternative 2 (Preferred Alternative).Regarding Section 4.3.2.2 (Long Range Strike Weapons Systems Evaluation Program). This action is being addressed in the cumulative impact section as it is a ‘Present and Reasonably Foreseeble Action’ within the action area of the proposed NSWC training activities. The activities associated with that program are not part of the proposed training activities assessed in the Draft and Final EAs. The Long Range Strike Weapons Systems Evaluation Program is completely separate action and has completed its separate required NEPA documentation. The Navy prepared the Draft EA to assess the environmental impact of the proposed training activities considering criteria for significance under both State and Federal standards (Hawaii Administrative Rules Section 11-200-12 and 40 Code of Federal Regulations Section 1508). The Draft EA anticipated a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). Based on the analysis presented in the Draft and Final EAs; consultations with the USFWS, NMFS, Hawaii Office of Planning, Coastal Zone Management Program, and Hawaii SHPO; coordination with the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources; and consideration of public comments, no significant impacts have been identified and the analysis in the Final EA continues to support a FONSI with the implementation of the Proposed Action as described under the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 2). The proposed training would not significantly impact the quality of the human or natural environment.

 

letter to Jim Albertini from the Navy received June 4, 2021

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
COMMANDER
NAVY REGION HAWAII
850 TICONDEROGA ST STE 110
JBPHH, HAWAII 96860-5101
5000-45E
N45
April 12, 2021
Jim Albertini (ja@malu-aina.org)
Dear Jim Albertini:
SUBJECT: COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) FOR NAVAL
SPECIAL OPERATIONS TRAINING IN THE STATE OF HAWAII
Thank you for participating in the National Environmental Policy Act process. Your comment letter
has been received and is included in Appendix C (Comments and Responses) of the Final EA.
Your concern about military expansion is outside the scope of the project. However, for clarification
and as discussed in Section 1.1 (Introduction) of the Draft and Final EAs, naval special operations
personnel have been training in certain areas of the State of Hawaii for decades. The Proposed Action is
needed to meet current training deficiencies and ultimately provide combat ready naval special operation
forces.
During the development of the alternatives, Naval Special Warfare Command (NSWC) considered
three training area screening factors (training, safety and logistics) when identifying an area that could
support warm weather naval special operations training and satisfy the training requirements as described
in Section 2.4 (Training Area Screening Factors). Following the review of the screening factors, it was
determined that the training study area in the State of Hawaii fulfills all of the beginning/intermediate,
warm weather maritime climate requirements prior to advancing to more challenging (colder weather)
environments. In addition to meeting the training requirements, the safety and logistical training area
screening factors presented in Section 2.4 are also satisfied by training in the State of Hawaii. Thus, the
State of Hawaii fully satisfies all three training area screening factors and is considered the only feasible
warm weather maritime location for training naval special operations personnel.
The “increase in training” and “size of study area” are not what trigger the need to conduct an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). An EIS is prepared when an agency determines that a proposed
action may significantly affect the quality of the environment. The Navy prepared the Draft EA to assess
the environmental impact of the proposed training activities considering criteria for significance under
both State and Federal standards (Hawaii Administrative Rules [HAR] Section 11-200-12 and 40 Code of
Federal Regulations [CFR] Section 1508). The Draft EA anticipated a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI). Based on the analysis presented in the EA, consultations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and Hawaii State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO), coordination with the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, and
consideration of public comments, no significant impacts have been identified and the analysis in the
Final EA continues to support a FONSI with the implementation of the Preferred Alternative (Alternative
2). The proposed training would not significantly impact the quality of the human or natural
environment; therefore, the preparation of an EIS is not necessary.
Chapter 3 (Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences) of the Draft and Final EAs
presents an analysis of the potential direct and indirect effects of each alternative. Chapter 4 (Cumulative
Impacts) of the Draft and Final EAs evaluates the impact on the environment that may result from the5000-45E
N45
April 12, 2021
incremental impact of the action when added to the other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future
actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions. The
environmental impacts from the proposed training activities are expected to be minimal, short term, and
temporary based on the (1) relatively low intensity of the impacts, (2) localized nature of the impacts, (3)
infrequent nature of the impacts, and (4) brief duration of the activities (see Table 2-4 of the Final EA).
The Navy assessed the potential effect of the proposed training on marine and terrestrial biological
resources. As the analysis in the Draft and Final EAs shows, there would be no significant impacts on
these resources. The Navy has consulted with the USFWS and NMFS for the Proposed Action, and the
same conclusion was reached. Please refer to Section 3.3 (Biological Resources) for a full analysis of the
Navy’s potential impacts on biological resources. Correspondence regarding consultations with the
USFWS and NMFS is presented in Appendix A (Agency Correspondence) of the Final EA.
As discussed in Section 2.1.1 (Training Activities), all training activities would be non-invasive.
NSWC would not build training devices or infrastructure at any site during the proposed training
activities. The proposed training does not include the use of live-fire ammunition, explosive demolitions,
off-road driving, digging, vegetation cutting or removal (with the exception of one federal property
location), tree climbing, construction, building camp fires, or leaving human waste at any training site.
The intent of naval special operations training activities is for trainees to remain undetected and to leave
no trace of their presence during or after the training activity. Proposed training would occur only on
sites with the permission of landowners or managers and receipt of rights of entry or other real estate
agreements. In addition, only water-based and land-based training is proposed for the Island of Hawaii;
no air-based training would occur. Please note the purple area depicted on the maps in the Draft and Final
EAs is a study area and is greater in area than the sites where training activities would occur.
The Navy utilized the best available science to identify the cultural resources, including traditional
cultural properties, in the training study area. Please refer to Section 3.4 (Cultural Resources) for a full
analysis of historic properties, which are cultural resources that include prehistoric and historic districts,
sites, buildings, structures, or objects included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of
Historic Places including properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to Native Hawaiian
Organizations that meet the National Register Criteria. The Navy also consulted with the Hawaii SHPO,
and 62 Native Hawaiian Organizations, historic partners, and the public. The Navy determined that the
proposed undertaking for the NSWC to conduct land, maritime, and air-based training activities in the
State of Hawaii will result in no historic properties affected in accordance with Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The SHPO has concurred with a Finding of No Adverse
Effect and the Navy’s Section 106 requirements have been completed. Correspondence regarding the
NHPA Section 106 consultation effort is presented in Appendix A (Agency Correspondence) of the Final
EA.
NSWC does not anticipate disruptions to the community, local economy or the environment. The
intent of the proposed training is to build trainees’ skills, experience, and confidence by challenging them
in a location with dynamic weather, varied terrain, and warm-water conditions. As part of the rigorous
training, the trainees learn skills needed to avoid detection along with the goal of leaving no trace of their
presence during or after training activities. Proposed training would occur only on sites with the
permission of landowners or managers (e.g., State Parks, private property owners, etc.). NSWC also
coordinates with local police departments and law enforcement prior to conducting training activities.5000-45E
N45
April 12, 2021
The Navy values your participation in the environmental review process. All comments that have
been received are included in Appendix C (Public Comments and Responses) of the Final EA. The Final
EA for Naval Special Operations Training, State of Hawaii is available at:
https://www.navfac.navy.mil/navfac_worldwide/pacific/about_us/national-environmental-policy-act–
nepa–information.html under “NEPA documents available for public review” at the bottom of the page.
Sincerely,
SHERRI R. ENG
Director
Regional Environmental Department
By direction of the Commander
Enclosure: January 5, 2019 comment letter from Jim Albertini.
Copy to: Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources

Feed for this entry. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.