Landing field opponents seek new timeline from Navy
TF Note: Could the TIA EIS simply be extended/delayed, leaving everyone hanging?
By Kate Wiltrout
The Virginian-Pilot
© June 11, 2010
Three groups who oppose Navy plans for a jet practice landing field in Virginia or North Carolina have banded together to ask the service a simple question: What’s next?
Representatives of Virginians Against the Outlying Landing Field, Citizens against OLF Gates/Hertford North Carolina, and Concerned Citizens Against OLF Camden/Currituck North Carolina sent a letter Tuesday to Adm. John C. Harvey Jr., head of the Navy’s Fleet Forces Command in Norfolk. It asks Harvey to release a new timeline for the proposed project by July 1.
The field would be used by fighter jets based at Oceana Naval Air Station in Virginia Beach to simulate carrier landings.
The Navy originally intended to finish its draft environmental impact statement on five proposed sites – three in Virginia and two in North Carolina – by March 2009, with a final decision made by July 2010.
But in August, the Navy announced it would broaden its landing field analysis to consider whether its next-generation fighter jet, the F-35 or Joint Strike Fighter, would also use the practice field.
Fleet Forces Command said at the time that the draft probably would be pushed back until spring 2010.
“Spring has now come and gone yet there is still no (draft environmental impact statement) and no updated information on its release schedule has been made available,” the letter said.
A spokeswoman for Fleet Forces Command said Thursday that the Navy is still in the midst of its “deliberative process.”
“We are committed to being as open as possible and getting the information to the public as soon as it becomes available,” said Capt. Cate Mueller, a Navy spokeswoman.
She said she did not know when an updated timeline would be available.
The groups contend that the looming prospect of a practice landing field has made people and businesses hesitant to buy property or make long-term plans in their communities.
“Farmers are hesitant to invest in capital equipment, lenders are reluctant to take a security interest in real property that may be adversely impacted by proximity to an OLF, and real estate prices are depressed by the potential of an OLF in the vicinity,” the letter says.
Tony Clark, chairman of the Virginia group, said this is the first time the three organizations have teamed up. They’re all frustrated by what they say is a lack of information.
“There are five communities that are being held hostage right now,” he said. “All we’re asking for is the respect of being kept informed. If they think it’s going to be two more years, then tell us it’s going to be two more years.”
Kate Wiltrout, (757) 446-2629, kate.wiltrout@pilotonline.com
More Pilot Social Media feeds Related
•Provision in defense bill could stop OLF study funding – Jun. 9, 2010
•Navy eyes rental of airport runways – Apr. 3, 2010
•OLF in N.C. would harm schools, activists say – Feb. 28, 2010
•Commissioners from 3 N.C. counties meet on OLF – Feb. 24, 2010
•Currituck commissioners ‘outraged’ at 5-year-old OLF study – Feb. 16, 2010
Recent Comments