Army to resume live-fire training at Makua

By William Cole and Johnny Brannon
Advertiser Staff Writers

After months of debate and sometimes marathon meetings with the community, the Army yesterday reached essentially the same conclusion about Makua Valley that it did in December: It is the best place for live-fire training by Hawai'i troops, and an environmental impact statement is unnecessary.

Army Brig. Gen. Karl Eikenberry gestures while describing the military training that takes place in Makua Valley. Eugene Tanner • The Honolulu Advertiser

"We believe that our studies and state-of-the-art environmental programs strongly demonstrate that we can resume training at Makua while we protect the environment," Eikenberry, assistant division commander (support) for the 25th Infantry Division (Light), said yesterday.

After a 30-day review period, the Army plans to begin educating soldiers about cultural and environmental sites within Makua.

Live-fire training at Makua has been an issue over the past several years, coming to a head in 1998 when training was suspended over concerns about environmental damage from military activities. The Army stopped training after several fires were started in the valley by munitions that fell outside of earmarked areas.

The often divisive debate has pitted the Army, with its desire to continue training, against those who seek to protect the valley's archaeological sites and natural resources.

Threatening the Army's plan to return is a pending lawsuit by environmental groups Malama Makua and the Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund seeking a comprehensive environmental impact statement on the Army's use of Makua. U.S. District Judge Susan Oki Mollway had given the Army until May 29 to decide whether it would rely on an environmental assessment or proceed with an environmental impact statement.

Earthjustice attorney David Henkin yesterday called the Army's environmental assessment a "travesty," and charged that it contains "Orwellian" distortions, falsely minimizing the danger live-fire exercises pose to the valley.

"There's no question this is unacceptable," Henkin said. "This is the most outrageous attempt to pull one over on the public."

Henkin said the environmental group will challenge the document in court and seek an injunction barring exercises in the valley if the Army attempts to resume training.

To force the Army to prepare the more detailed environmental impact statement, Henkin said, his group need only show that a return to exercises has the potential to significantly harm the environment. The Army, maintaining that an environmental statement is not needed, has said it would cost $2 million to $5 million to conduct the study and take up to five years.

"It would not be right for our Army to watch the continued decline of our leaders' and soldiers' readiness by delaying training to conduct a study that is not warranted by the facts and our analysis," Eikenberry said. "We are confident that a majority of those who take the time to read our study and proposal will be persuaded."

The Army has made use of Makua since the 1920s and has conducted live-fire exercises there since 1942. In recent years, vocal opposition by some Leeward Coast residents has increased.

•	Makua update The Army says Makua is critical to readiness. Others aren't so sure. Here's the latest:
•	The Army has announced its intent to resume live-fire training at the Makua Military Reservation, as soon as July.
•	An environmental assessment released yesterday finds "no significant impact" on the Makua Valley training grounds from continued exercises and live-fire training as proposed.
•	The Army will conduct cultural and environmental training for officers in preparation for resuming live-fire training.
•	Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund plans to challenge the Army findings in court and pledges to seek an injunction barring live-fire training.
•	Opponents continue to call for an environmental impact statement.
•	The Army suspended live-fire training at Makua in 1998. The current plan would eliminate tracer and incendiary ammunition, aerial rockets and anti-tank missiles, once used in the valley.

The Army has said troop readiness has suffered since training was suspended in 1998. Army standards call for the 25th Division's 18 infantry companies to do the kind of training it was conducting at Makua at least once a year, during day and night conditions.

The 25th Division went to California and Thailand to conduct six company-level live-fire training exercises in fiscal 1999. In fiscal 2000, the division did not complete any company exercises that met training standards; for fiscal 2001, seven company maneuvers were completed at the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Polk, La.

Eikenberry yesterday said the decision to return to Makua was not an easy one and "we realize Makua is a passionate issue for many people."

But soldiers' lives are a passionate issue for the Army, he said.

"Our soldiers will ultimately be the ones who must answer our nation's call," Eikenberry said. "When this call comes, the Army in Hawai'i must be trained and ready to fight and to win. The time to train is not then — the time to train is now."

The Army says that it would cost millions and take several years to build training courses elsewhere and that other Army-leased or owned lands are unsuitable. Eikenberry has said Makua is the only place in Hawai'i where soldiers can conduct combined-arms live-fire training.

The Army issued a draft environmental assessment last September and collected public comment. A preliminary finding of no significant impact was announced in December, but the Army withdrew that finding two months later in the face of community opposition.

In December, as it does now, the Army pledged to stop using four types of ammunition believed to have contributed to 60 percent of the fires started in Makua — tracer, anti-tank, aerial rockets and illumination rounds. The exercise area also has become smaller.

The Army used all the training area, excluding the mountainsides, from 1942 to 1985. It used 900 acres between 1985 and 1990, and has used 456 of the more than 4,000 acres since 1990.

The Army also plans to practice comprehensive fire control, and to preserve cultural and environmental resources. A fire management plan is expected to have an initial start-up cost of $1.2 million and then cost $600,000 annually.

After live-fire training was suspended in 1998, a U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service evaluation of endangered plants and animals found that training in the valley bottom would not likely jeopardize endangered species, which are found in higher elevations.

Public meetings held over the Army's environmental assessment included a 10-hour marathon session on Jan. 27. Among the issues addressed were the transportation of ammunition along Farrington Highway and contamination of drinking water.

The new assessment maintains groundwater testing has found no contaminants, and speaks to the issue of troop traffic along Farrington Highway, saying convoys would be routed along the highway during non-peak periods.

State Rep. Bob McDermott, R-32nd (üliamanu, Salt Lake, 'Aiea), said he would prefer that training resume while an environmental impact statement is under way, an idea he floated earlier this month.

"That would be the best way to pacify the community and to remove any doubt," he said. "I have no doubt the Army is telling the truth, but for some reason some folks don't trust them."

William Aila Jr., whose family owned land in Makua Valley before the military took control, said an environmental impact statement would shed more light on decades of military firing in the valley.

"The community has consistently said, 'What are the impacts of 60 years of the use of Makua Valley?'" he said. "That's where the fundamental disagreement is occurring."

McDermott questioned whether some opponents of training at Makua Valley were really more interested in forcing the Army to leave O'ahu entirely. That would seriously hamper the Army's training and would harm the local economy, he said.

"Maybe they don't want an EIS," he said. "Maybe they want the Army out. If they can't train, they'll leave at some point. There are communities that will welcome them and welcome the jobs. Wahiawa would be a ghost town."

Native Hawaiian activist Frenchy DeSoto blasted the Army's findings but said she was not surprised.

"The system works against the people," she said. "They've got the money and we don't. To them we're just poor little kanakas living on the coast who should sacrifice for national defense."

The Army should fully account for its activities in the area during the last 60 years, DeSoto said.

"If my dog goes and makes a mess in your yard, you'd expect me to clean it up," she said.

Suggestions that the Army will leave if denied access to Makua Valley are "economic blackmail," DeSoto added.

U.S. Rep. Patsy Mink could not be reached for comment yesterday but has said the Army should prepare a full environmental impact statement before any training resumes. U.S. Sen. Daniel Inouye believes that the Army should resume training at Makua Valley as soon as possible, said Jennifer Sabas, his chief of staff for Hawai'i.

"He feels the Army has done a thorough job investigating environmental concerns," she said. "He is concerned that because of the critical need for training, the loss of Makua Valley could really have detrimental consequences regarding the Army's continued presence in Hawai'i."

Sabas said Inouye would seek federal money to monitor groundwater for contamination and address other community concerns.

"Hopefully, through those types of programs it will allow the two sides to heal and move forward," she said.

Military Affairs Writer William Cole can be reached at 525-8030 or wcole@honoluluadvertiser.com