Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM010587 .. :. ~.. ~~ . I ifIi iflil , H , 3EFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS I H HI IH _I District No.1 Commissioner: LarryW.Dennison, Chairman I -, District No.2 Commissioner: B.G. Brown, Member I HI District No.3 Commissioner: George C.. Brown, Member 1_ ifIi , , ifIi iflil Clerk of the Board: 3erdine C. Bragg I _ HI Public Works Director: Gary A. Rowe I H H' IH H' H M I N U TE S Week of 3anuary 5, 1987 Chairman Larry W. Dennison palled the meeting to order in the presence of Commissioner George C. Brown and Commissioners B. G. Brown. Marv Gabourv, Auditor re:.Personnel Matter: The Board met with Auditor, Mary Gaboury in Executive Session to discuss a personnel matter. Art Hultin, resident of Woodland Acres, Hadlock re: Garbaae dumpina, and disturbina the peace in the Woodland Acres neiahborhood: Mr. Hultin reported to the Board that the Sheriff has been to the Woodland Acres area two times in the past year regarding illegal ~ garbage dumping and was able to identify the people responsible and ... they were forced to clean up the mess. Recently, however, there has not been anyway for the Sheriff to identify who is dumping the garbage. There is garbage on some property now owned by Wanda Cotton. Mr. Hultin would like to see some kind of barrier installed that would deny access to this property from the County road. The Public Works department and the Health Department have been advised of this problem, but nothing has been done about it. Mrs. Cotton has been advised but she says she cannot do anything. Another problem Mr. Hultin reported, is vehicles coming in at all times of the day and night and using the property owned by Mrs. Cotton for parties. Mr. Hultin submitted a petition with signature of the neighborhood property owners asking for help with these problems. The problem, Chairman Dennison noted is illegal garbage dumping, not illegal access and the Sheriff has to deal with it. Public Works Director, Gary Rowe, stated that the County Engineer has looked at this property and advised that possibly ditching spoils could be used to block off some.of these accesses. This would not stop trucks from going over the material, however. The County would have to have permission from the property owner(s) involved before any dirt could be dumped to curtail access. After further discussion of the area involved as well as the property ownership Commissioner B.G. Brown stated that a load of dirt could be put at the end ofthe3rd Street and Frame Street rights~of-way. The other accesses would have to be blocked by Wanda Cotton. Mr. Hultin will contact Mrs. Cotton and have her advise the PUblic Works Department if she approves of the proposal to dump ditching spoils on the access roads. Homer Smith III, Homer Smith Insurance, Inc. re: Boiler & Machinery Insurance Renewal: Homer Smith III reported that the renewal of the insurance policy that covers the boiler and machinery the County :'VOL 13 rAGE .,~.:,. 1 ~;-~ Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 2 owns and is not cover.ed under the Countys' general liability policy, is now due. The renewal policy does not cover the boiler (itself) at the Port Townsend Community Center, but it will cover the damage caused if that boiler explodes. Commissioner B.G. Brown moved to approve and sign the Boiler and Machinery Insurance renewal for 1987. Commissioner George Brown seconded the motion. BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS PUBLIC WORKS BID OPENING re: The Furn1shina of Liauid Asphalt: The bids for supplying liquid asphalt to the County Public Works Department for 1987 were opened and read by the Clerk of the Board at the appointed time: BIDDERS: BID TOTALS: U. S. Oil and Refining Company, Tacoma $166,000.00 (Unit Prices: Asphalt CMS2 $125.00; Asphalt CRS2 $120.00; Asphalt MC250 $165.00) Chevron U.S.A., Seattle 154,000.00 * (Unit Prices: Asphalt CMS2 $114.75; Asphalt CRS2 $114.75; Asphalt MC250 $163.00) * Washington State sales tax not included. FOB Chevron, Richmond Beach, maximums quoted through 9/30/87. Commissioner B.G. Brown moved to direct the Public Works Department to check the bids for accuracy and make an award recommendation. Commissioner George Brown s.econded the motion. Bid Award re: Furnishinaof Petroleum Products for 1987: (See also Minutes of December 15, 1986) Gary Rowe explained that the bid received from Chevron (Oil Heat of Port Angeles) was the high bid for regular and unleaded gasoline. The Public Works Department received a note Chuck Boggs, the local Chevron representative, which indicated that he had made a mistake in the bid because he had included State and federal gas tax in the bid amounts. The Public Works Department recommends that the Chevron bid be rejected because it was made in error. The Chimacum and Quilcene school districts have asked for prices on heavy crude oil in the past and they did not advise the Public Works department that they now have diesel boilers and do not need heavy crude oil. Two of the bidders bid on the heavy crude oil and one did not (but they included an alternate bid on diesel) because they knew the schools had converted their system. This is another inconsistency in the bids. Commissioner B.G. Brown moved to award the bid for petroleum products as follows: Regular and unleaded gasoline and diesel for the Transit system Harper Oil of Port Townsend All other diesel to East 3efferson County Thomas Oil Port Townsend Fuels for the West End West Wholesale in Forks Propane bid Buckeye Gas Products of Port Angeles as recommended by the Public Works Department. Commissioner George Brown seconded the motion. Commissioner B.G. Brown then moved to re- : VOL . .---_. 2 13 fACt" ~.O ,to .' Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 3 advertise and call for bids on the diesel fuel for the School Districts, with the bid opening to be set for January 20, 1986 at 2:00 p.m. Commissioner George Brown seconded the motion. PLANNING/BUILDING DEPARTMENT Review of Complaint bv Gerald Phillips re: Clayton Sartain Property, Quilcene: Planning Department Director, David Goldsmith reported that he had received a letter from Mr. Gerald Phillips requesting that a Stop Work order be placed on a piece of property located along the Qul1cene River. Mr. Phillips stated that the property does not meet the rules and requirements for a building site. The Health Department will be making a site inspection of the septic system and drainfield on this property sometime this month. There has not been a building permit applied for on this site. David Goldsmith reported that he explained to Mr. Phillips that any building activity on the site would have to meet all of the requirements and regulations in force at the time that a building permit application was made. Mr. Gerald Phillips of Quilcene then stated that he has been accused of being a "whistle blower" and causing problems regarding this property. The septic system on this property suffers from severe setback problems that were originally caused by the Health Department (by not being responsive) the contractor and the Planning Department. Mr. Phillips continued by stating that there has been an outright flagrant abuse of the rules by the contractor and the extreme softness of the Health Department's enforcement of the rules. The fill on this site was brought to the attention of the Health Department on 3uly 12, 1984. Mr. Phillips then submitted and read a written statement to the Board, After which he continued by requesting a full public hearing to provide evidence to the contrary of the Planning Departments' stance. He asked that an on-site inspection be done which he could attend before the final hearing. He concluded by stating that the evidence will show that the lot in question has no use other than a recreational site for temporary use using an R.V.type holding tanks. Discussion continued regarding the site and the time that the landfill and septic system were installed on it. Mrs. Phillips added that the septic system was installed immediately after the fill was put on the site. Commissioner B.G. Brown asked Mr. Phillips what he is asking the Board to do regarding this property? Mr. Phillips advised that he would like to see the lot declared a "Recreational" lot. CommissionerB.G. Brown added that nothing can be resolved until the Health Department prOVides more information after their site inspection later this month. Mrs. Phillips stated that the contractor falsified the septic system permit that was issued and this should be investigated. Chairman Dennison directed the Health Department to put together a chronology of events that have taken place on this site so that the whole issue can be reviewed with regard to the regulations that were in effect at the time. The "as built" plans presented by the contractor will be evaluated to determine if there were errors in that process and a site inspection will be done. The discussion continued regarding the Phillips' reqUest to be present during the site inspection. Mrs. Phillips advised that there is a question of trust regarding the Health Department. The Sartain's have stated that the Phillips' are not allowed on their property. As soon as all of the information is gathered, a meeting will be held to discuss the issues The Phillips' will be notified of this meeting. Quilcene Bav Water Qualitv Study; Status Report: Bill Banks reported that Cascadia Research has issued a draft of their study of the impact that seals have in an area, which will be presented to the LVOL 13 f'Acf~O~' 3 t. . . . . Board Of Commissioners'Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 4 Advisory Committee later in the week. More studies are needed to make any specific determinations. The intensive neighborhood surveys have been finished for the water quality study except for the wet weather sampling. A briefing on the Water Quality Study will be given at a later date. * * * Liauor License Transfer; Four Corners Store: B.G. Brown moved to approve the liquor license transfer Corners Store as recommended by the Health Department. George Brown seconded the motion. ' Commissioner for the Four Commissioner Application for Dance License: Whistlina Oyster Tavern, Quilcene: The 1987 dance license for the Whistling Oyster Tavern in Quilcene was approved by motion of Commissioner B,G. Brown, seconded by Commissioner George Brown. The meeting was recessed after the Board met with the Guild Negotiating Team, and was reconvened on Tuesday m9rning with all Board members present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The Minutes for t~e Week of December 22, 1986 were approved by motion of Commissioner B.G. Brown and seconded by Commissioner George Brown. 1986 Budaet Transfer: Assessor and Cooperative Extension Departments: Resolution No. !::.n was approved byjmotion of Commissioner B.G. Brown, seconded by Commissioner.George Brown authorizing the 1986 budget transfers requested by the Assessor and Cooperative Extension departments. AGREEMENT re: Educational and Research Services for 1987: 3efferson County Economic Development Council: Th~ 1987 Agreement with the 3efferson County Economic Development Council,forprovision of research and planning services in regard to economic development in the County was approved by motion of CommissionerB.G~ Brown, seconded by Commissioner George Brown. The agreement amount is $5,000.00. I ~.vOL . '-('1-- "-- 4 i 13 rAGE....lJ-. ! f\~ 0. . Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 5 Authorization for PaYment of Emplovees Group Membership Initiation Fees (or One months dues) for Members of the Port Townsend Athletic Club: The Auditor was directed to issue a check for $844.00 to the Port Townsend Athletic Club for paYment of the 3efferson County group members initiation fees, or one months dues for those group members who previously joined the club and to set up the noted payroll deduction. The Chairman signed the approval by motion of Commissioner B.G. Brown, seconded by Commissioner George Brown. The meeting was recessed on Tuesday evening and reconvened on Thursday morning with all Board members in attendance. Emergencv Services ProaramPaper: The Board reviewed the Emergency Services Program Paper and after the Sheriff signed it, Commissioner B.G. Brown moved to have the Chairman sign it. Commissioner George Brown seconded the motion. CONTRACT, Amendment re: Detention of 3uvenile Offenders for 1987: KitsaD County: Commissioner B.G. Brown moved to approve Contract Amendment #4 with Kitsap County for the Detention of 3uvenile Offenders in their facilities for 1987. Commissioner George Brown seconded the motion. Lieutenant Commander Mark A. Van Dvke; U. S. Navv, Public Affairs Officer; Naval Undersea Warfare Enaineerina Station (HOWES) KeVDort re: Indian Island Detachment Development: The following is a verbatim transcription of this briefing before the Board of County Commissioners and approximately 40 interested area residents: Chairman Dennison: The purpose of the meeting this morning is to just basically allow the Commissioners to ask questions of Lieutenant Commander Mark Van Dyke. I'd like to start by giving a little bit of background. Mark is Public Affairs Officer for Rear Admiral Paul Reason who is the Commander of the Naval Base in Seattle. He is also Senior Public Affairs Officer for puget Sound. The Naval Base in Seattle, that is, Rear Admiral Reason, is the coordinator for Naval and I guess also Marine activities in the northwest. Now, I don't know whether I have this exactly right and so I'll rely on Mark to back me up when he starts, if I've made any mistakes. I'll give you a little bit more background on Mark. He's a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy in Maryland. He has completed Surface Warfare Officer School in Coronado California. Has been a Propulsion Engineering Assistant aboard the USS Decatur, a guided missile destroyer home ported in San Diego. He reported for duty as an officer and recruiter with the Navy Recruiting District in Albany New York in 1979. In 1980 he was appointed by the Secretary of the Navy as a Special Duty Public Affairs Officer assigned to the staff of Commander, Navy Recruiting Area 1, Scotia New York. Commander Van Dyke returned to the Naval Academy in 1982 for assignment as Assistant Public Affairs Officer on the staff of the Superintendent. In 1984 he reported to his current assignment as Assistant Chief of Staff for Public Affairs, Naval Base, Seattle Washington. In this capacity he serves as spokesman for Commander Naval Base and coordinates Navy public affairs activities in the three state area of Washington, Alaska and Oregon. He ha~ awards which include: The Navy Commendation Medal, the Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Navy Expeditionary Medal, the National Defense Medal and the Humanitarian Service Medal. With that I'd like to welcome Lieutenant Commander Mark Van Dyke. Thank you very much for being with us. We appreciate the opportunity to present our questions to you. I would again like to reiterate the fact that the purpose of this meeting is for the County Commissioners to ask questions of Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke and I would hope that everyone would help me in understanding that, while this is an emotional issue, for us to get ~VOL 13 fAGE r n' 5 . . Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 6 emotionally involved in this particular exchange, I don't think will do any of us any good. And, so I would hope that you will take the opportunity to listen and please not comment or do anything that would detract from this briefing session. And I thank you for coming as well. Okay, well Mark why don't you give us a brief statement as to what you're doing here and we'll proceed. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Okay. Thank you Mr. Dennison. First of all I don'tknow who was responsible, but I want to thank you gentlemen for the welcome mat that you provided this morning. It was a beautiful drive up from Seattle with the white frQst all along the way, but I really didn't appreciate the ice that you laid out there for me. Also shot my nerves but it was a nice trip up and thank you for the invitation. As Mr. Dennison mentioned, I'm here representing Commander Naval Base Seattle Rear Admiral Paul Reason and also the Commanding Officer of the Naval Undersea Warfare Engineering Station Keyport,Captain Robert Hoag. We were invited to come up and brief the Commissioners and provide information on the proposed development program at Indian Island and I appreciate the opportunity to do so. As Navy spokesman and the Public Affair Coordinator for the region, perhaps I should explain my exact duties in that regard. I assist Admiral Reason in coordinating public affairs matters between approximately 150 Navy commands that encompass the region including Alaska, Washington and Oregon state. We have a small staff down there that responds to news media queries as well as the public inquires 'that we receive nearly every day. I've talked to many residents here in the 3efferson County area and also a number of new media and I appreciate the concern that you and your constituents have expressed in regards to the development program at Indian Island. And therefore I appreciate this formal opportunity to provide the information which is currently available to the public. At the conclusion of my prepared statement I will take questions from you gentlemen and, as I mentioned to Mr. Dennison, I am prepared to meet at the convenience of the Commissioners with members of the local news media that may be here in attendance. I should point out, however, that I am not a technical expert in the area of Naval Facilities Planning, or Ordnance Operations. I may be unable to answer many of your questions or I may be restricted by Navy or Department of Defense policy from answering certain questions. But, I assure you with the assistance of your recorder that I will respond to those questions that I'm not able to answer today. I'll do my best to prepare an appropriate response and get that back to you at a later date. By Public Notice dated October 4, 1985, the U.S. Navy announced a proposal requested by Naval Undersea Warfare Engineering Station Keyport to develop some port facilities at their Indian Island Detachment located near Hadlock. Copies of this document have previously been provided to the 3efferson County Board of Commissioners as well as other federal, state and local offices. The development program is designed to support Indian Island's mission of ammunition storage and refurbishment which, in turn, supports regional fleet needs. These regional needs would include an area roughly of the puget Sound and the eastern Pacific Ocean. Those areas in which the Third Fleet unit of our U.S. Navy operate in. The Indian Island development program is considered to be especially important in view of the growing value and importance of our sea trade lanes in the northern Pacific Ocean and the Gulf of Alaska. For those that don't know, the balance of trade has shifted from the Atlantic to the Pacific and the Pacific now is much more important, much busier, than the Atlantic trade lanes. The requirements of Indian Island are also growing to support this consequential increase of the Navy's Third Fleet operations in the North Pacific basic in order to protect these vital trade lanes. Indian Island has the only ammunition handling wharf in this region capable of supporting the anticipated fleet needs for the next several ~VOL 13 rACE '9~'- 6 ,t. . . . . Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 7 years. I should add that these broad regional needs, and I emphasize regional, include but are not limited solely to, the proposed carrier battle group which is intended to be home ported in nearby Everett within the next few years. The proposed development program, if approved, would consist of the construction of new facilities and improvements to existing facilities which would include new magazine storage facilities, operations and maintenance facilities, pier and wharf improvement, road improvements and also recreational facilities. Construction, if approved, would begin in 1987, calendar year 1987, and would be expected to continue through calendar year 1991. Now, this is contingent upon the annual Congressional funding authorization and appropriations process. The White House staff announced this week that President Reagan has sent forward to Congress the defense budget request for fiscal years 1988 and 1989. I'd like to outline some of the Indian Island military construction projects that were included in those budgets. It includes four to be specific. A fiscal year 1988 request for 2.17 million dollars for an explosives operating facility and 6 million dollars for a missile magazine or magazines, I should say plural. And also fiscal year 1989 requests for 2.64 million dollars for an ammunition handling wharf improvement package and $970,000 for fire station improvements. Project proposed for fiscal year 1990 and beyond are still under consideration by the Department of the Navy and as such have not been announced. Again, I must emphasize that all of the above projects still require Congressional approval. In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and also the Council on Environmental Quality Guidelines, the Navy has prepared an Environmental Assessment for the Indian Island Development Program. The Assessment or EA, as we shorten the title, has been submitted to the Office of Naval Operations for review. The EA will analyze potential environmental impacts of the proposed development program and. it will determine whether or not the proposed action will significantly effect the environment. Upon completion of the assessment review, the Navy will issue a public statement regarding this position of the assessment. After that time the public may request to review the environmental assessment. I should add that the normal review period for an environmental assessment is anywhere from 30 to 45 days. That's an average and the document has been forwarded. So, I don't have an exact date,. but I would expect that the resul ts of that would be announced shortly. In closing, before I take questions, I would like to take this opportunity to point out the outstanding relationship the Navy has enjoyed with the citizens of 3efferson County since the establishment of Indian Island Naval Magazine back in 1941 and perhaps even further beyond that. Since then the Navy has been an active and a healthy part of the surrounding community as illustrated by the many community relations programs hosted by Indian Island and also the careful stewardship of the land by Indian Island employees. Some of you may recall that in 1984 the Indian Island Detachment won the prestigious Navy and Department of Defense Environmental Conservation Awards. With eligibility limited to, I believe it's every two or three years, we expect Indian Island to be back in the competition again this year. And, one has to look only as far as your nearby neighbors to recognize . the valuable resource of retired military personnel in the area. Active duty, reserve, civilian and military, many of these having served at Indian Island have settled in this region. Many of these residents are, as I'm sure you are, convinced that we need a strong defense, and I'm convinced that the people of 3efferson County support a strong defense and an active military presence in the region. Even in the early history, I think it's well known that Forts such as Townsend, Worden and Flagler, played a very important role in at least the defense of the puget Sound if not beyond. We look forward to continued good relations and your cooperation as we together strive to support the growing fleet requirements that we consider will serve the highest national security needs. Thank you for the opportunity to speak and I'm now prepared to take your questions. ~VOl 13 rACtfJI- 7 ," . . . . Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 8 Chairman Dennison: Thank you Mark. I'd like to also mention that Mark told me before we came in here that he would be willing to entertain questions from the press immediately afterwards and I think the way we'll do that, if members of the press are here and care to speak to Mark, is that we'll do that in the inner office. As you I'm sure know, Mark, among the main concern, here in 3efferson County, have to do with the reports that there was, or there is being planned, a $60 million upgrading of Indian Island over time. Many people have concerns, of course, that included in that will be the storage, planning for the storage of nuclear weapons, and I think those are the concerns that probably hit the closest and most emotionally to home for most of the people that have expressed concern around here. My main concern is for the health and safety of the citizens of 3efferson County. I think that's probably the principal charge of the Board of County Commissioners in this and any other County. And, so as a result I also have concerns with respect to the possible storage of nuclear weapons and what impact that might have on the local population. Most particularly I'm concerned about the storage, transportation and handling of nuclear weapons. I guess one of the things that is still a little baffling to me, and I've been in direct contact with Congressman Al Swift's office, and to date they've only been able to identify, in the Navy's plan, those projects that you mentioned from 1987 through 1991 which include the missile magazine. And, that it, that seems to fall short of the reports that we've gotten and so I guess my first question would be is there anything that you can tell us about the disparity between the reports that we've gotten through the news media particularly, the Bremerton Sun who I think first broke the story back in November and the information that we have available to us through the Congressman's office? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: Okay. That's a multi-faceted question. I think I'll take it, I'll break it down and take it by section. And let's go ahead and attack the tough one first, the nuclear issue. I often say that questions regarding the presence of nuclear weapons, by Navy or other DOD activities is perhaps the easiest question of all for me to answer. I don't mean to make light of it, but, I say that because I have a prepared response and that's one of the area that I spoke of earlier. I'm restricted by DOD policy to respond to those types of questions by neither confirming or denying the presence of nuclear weapons, either at a station, aboard an aircraft or aboard a ship. But, its' perhaps the most difficult question to answer because I realize how emotional the issue is, how close to home it hits and how difficult it is for us to respond. So, I will not now or in the foreseeable future be able to confirm for you whether or not we have nuclear weapons aboard any of our facilities. I can say that I would expect little to change, you mentioned transportation in and around 3efferson County. I see little change in that regard. The other questions that you asked about the price, the disparity between information on the programs that I mentioned and other programs that have been talked about, let me try to explain that. First of all I would hesitate to put any price tag at all on the combined development program or construction program for Indian Island because the only projects that have been identified to date would be those that I mentioned in the fiscal year '88-'89 budget. Those have gone through the clearinghouse, so to speak, and been brought up through the chain of command within the Navy, submitted to the Department of Defense for their review and approval and included in the President's final submission to the Congress. So those have been, I think it's safe to say, approved or recommended by Department of Defense. The other projects are still in a planning stage. Although we've identified a number of other projects, and again I'll refrain from citing a specific number because that changes from time to time depending on what projects are still supported and what projects are not, or perhaps projects being combined with other projects. It's a constantly changing figure. Other projects are under consideration and I mentioned some of those early in my opening statement. Construction of missile magazines ~VOl 13 fAct JD-- ~-- 8 r . . Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 9 (plural). The one for fiscal year '88 is one of the missile magazine packages and I think there's one or two others that are included, long range planning in out years. Improvements to the roads, improvements to other facilities that have not been included in this fiscal year '88-'89 package. But, again, I will refrain from identifying those at this time because we're not assured yet that those will be approved by Department of the Navy administration or the Department of Defense and therefore, may not ever come to fruition. However, I want to explain why some of the information on those projects does become available. And let me start out by saying the information on all those projects is contained in the environmental assessment which is an Environmental Policy Act requirement. We have to do that. We've complied with the Policy Act by conducting an Environmental Assessment to analyze the potential impacts of our proposed projects. We have to evaluate the, I don't know if you want to refer to it as, best case or worst case, the greatest number of projects, the greatest potential impact. So, although we may not choose to support some of the programs that were requested early on by Keyport, we have to identify those for the purposes of the Assessment and evaluate the potential impact that those projects would have on the surrounding environment. So, some of the information that has been publicized by the news media has probably come from portion of the Environmental Assessment. It's not open to the public, but portions of the Assessment were also distributed through scoping letter which I know you received. Soproba.bly a combination of data that's being collected found its' way into the public sector has contributed to a lot of speculation about other projects. Chairman Dennison: Excuse me, there were some fairly, I said specific and I don't know whether I really mean specific, because I don't know whether those figures were specific, but there were some specific figures given in some of those news reports and one that comes to my mind was $30 million. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Okay, right, I think those are probably early planning figures. The Navy, of course, has to estimate how much these projects would cost the government. We formalize that request in the submission package to the Secretary of the Navy, who then formalizes the request for the Navy by then sending it to Secretary Weinberg at DOD and after the paring process at DOD then he supports the DOD package by sending it forward to the President. In this process many of these project may fallout, but we have to start somewhere with a baseline figure of a budget request, and again, environmental impacts, and the feasibility of these programs. The budget figures may change. You're in government, I think you can appreciate probably the full hardiness of setting a price in concrete before it's gorie through the legislative process. We will not hold out hard fast figures before the Secretary of the Navy, and Defense and the President and the Congress have a chance to act on the budget, because, again, that may change. Witness the request for funding for the Everett Home Porting Project this fiscal year 1987. We had asked for close to $80 - $90 million worth of funding and received short of that, almost by half, $43.58 million. So, it would not be in our best interest now to identify a specific dollar figure that we, either we or ah, the community would benefit from, so to speak. It would be very misleading at this point to do that. But, let me explain why we have to start off a baseline. Those in government are probably familiar with the requirement of Congress before they review a military construction project. They have to take a look at, I thinks it's 33% or 35% design of that project, which means we must initiate a lot of planning even some contracting for design work and planning and engineering long before our project is ever approved. So, some early figures have to be used for planning purposes, contracts are awarded, money is actually spent, in some cases, before the actual project is approved. It's a very complicated process, this military construction process, but I think I've summarized it about as well as I ca~. ~VOL 13 fACE r1t--- ~- 9 ." . ' . ' Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 10 Commissioner B.G. Brown: That really does put the community in a bad situation because of the accumulative effects that the total project would have are, in other words, what we have to prepare for is a worst case or best case scenario, whichever you would want to call that and with the County's limited resources its really har~ to stay in tune and in step with, to gear up the impact on the County when the impacts the Navy are causi~g in a simultaneous way because of the lack of, the ability to know what's happening. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: I realize that and thatfsnot to say that we will not involve the appropriate State and local governments when the time comes. Again we're at a very early stage. None of the projects have been approved. There may be no impact at all, even if some of the projects are approved, there may be no impact. For those that are familiar with the environmental assessment process, you know that one of the findings that the Navy can issue is a finding of no significant impact. That's done quite frequently in cases where there's not a great deal of new construction or radical changes to existing facilities. However, pointing back to the Environmental Assessment, that is perhaps our best document, that we can present. We're not able to present it at this time because it's still under review and subject to change. However, when its acted on by the Chief of Naval Operations, again, its your right, as it is the publics right to request a review of that document. And it will spell out in great detail the projects that have been requested and endorsed by Keyport and other levels of the chain of command. I think in the near future that will be available to you and will answer many more questions than I can today. After the Assessment process is done, the military construction process takes its course, we get funding approved and we can start more detailed planning. Leading up to construction we would, of course, involve the County planners and other local government as well as other, I should add, private groups. There's no intention by the Navy to just work solely with local government. It is a, pretty much a public matter. And again, witness the case of Everett. We started that project probably four years ago .and it's only been within the last one or two that it's really picked up a full head of steam. We're now working very intimately with local government, the County, the City, the State and other federal agencies that will be part of the process later on. I think what we're facing here is, prompted by the interest generated by recent news articles, there is a demand for information and we're too early in the planning process to really provide it at this point. It will come. Commissioner B.G. Brown: Well, and I think, like you said, the one that easiest for you to answer about whether there would be nuclear weapons stored there is one that has really prompted a lot of the inquiry as far as our interests that we represent here and with no way to address that particular aspect of it, why that, and the environmental impact statement will not address that either. Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: Yes sir, that is correct. Commissioner B.G. Brown: So, there is probably no way that we're going to get the number one problem that, as I see it right now in 3efferson County, as to whether or not there will be nuclear weapons stored there, that has got a whole lot more peoples emotions going than whether or not Indian Island is expanded. Sol don't know how we're going to be able to deal with the Indian Island issue on its' merits as the expansion out there with this question out there that no one will answer. It's been obvious for quite some time, and you already addressed that today be saying that it will not be answered and you won't be able to answer it, so I think that the real issue as far as a lot of the resident are concerned, that have expressed their concerns so faranvway, is the issue of the storage of nuclear weapons which no matter how far down the road we go or how much is funded or whatever it be, that question will not be answered. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: that's true and I can't argue that point. It's a factor in every major military construction project that include ship arid aircraft and large stations and to date we have not been able to respond, or confirm or deny the specific questions about LVOl 13 i'Acr~Tf10 " . ' Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 11 the presence of nuclear weapons. In our planning process, I won't say that that information is not included in the environmental planning, because in many cases it is, but the portions of it that deal with classified information are appropriately classified and not available for general public. It would be available for review in the . appropriate forum, legal orotherwi.se, in the event that those policies are tested. As in the. case of the Battleship Surface Action Group that is to be home ported in Staten ISland New York. That pOlicy was challenged there. Going back I think a year, maybe a year and a half. Citizens that felt that.that information should be made available to the public, took it to court and it was ruled out at the State Supreme Court level, and the decision of the Defense Department's policy of withholding that information was upheld because it was in the best interest of national security. And, all I can say is, where that is, is that despite written and other comments I've rather heard to the effect, it is our policy to protect the interests of national security by withholding that information. I think you have to realize the world that we're in now. Not only are we trying to withhold that information from foreign countries, overseas, but in many cases, domestic threats as well. The threat of terrorism. We just don't want the information to get in the hands of people who could do a lot of mayhem with it. So that is our justification and our rationale for withholding that. We also rely very strongly on our safety program. And I realize also that that's been the subject of debate, but we feel we have the docUmentation that we can provide. It's a long history, dating over the more than 30 years where we have not, with any accident, threatened pUblic or private property and we rely very heavily on our safety precautions within the Navy and Department of Defense. The redundant system within our weapons that make it nearly impossible for that type of accident to occur even in the unlikely event of an explosion. And our personnel, and our reliability programs. Chairman Dennison: I have some prepared questions that I'd like to ask, but before I do I'd like to take an opportunity to question one of the points that you made, which was the accident record of the Navy and I assume that you're speaking of the Navy, and not of the military in particular, because I thinks it's fairly common knowledge that there have been a number of accidents. Albeit, the accidents that have happened, fortunately, have not caused widespread damage. But, there have been a number of accidents that have happened especially to the Air Force that I think, have probably cause people a lot of concern. Probably even more important though, than the fact that the accidents happened, was the fact that they happened maybe, well one that first happened in 1957 and wasn't disclosed until 1980. And so you can see that there's a little bit of difficulty on the part of the public and certainly those who are charged with public health and safety, in the matter of trusting, because there is so much secrecy involved. And, you know, essentially that information has been withheld from the public under the auspices of National Security, when in fact the public's health and safety were at risk during those times. So, I, actually I, that's not so much a question as a statement. More specifically, toward Indian Island, can you tell us currently is there any accident that could happen on Indian Island that might cause damage beyond the limit of government property there? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Well that's, that's kind of an open ended question and any is a very broad term. I don't think anybody would be willing to testify that under no circumstances ever would there by that kind of an accident that would not effect surrounding areas. But let me describe the safety parameters at Indian Island and tell you how unlikely, highly unlikely, that is. When an ammunition facility, be it the handling facility here, a wharf, magazine, is designed, it is designed with.a safety arc in mind. Technical term would be Explosive Safety Quality Distance Arc (ESQD), explosive safety arc for short~. Going into the design for the arc itself would be the type of weapons that you would store and explosive capacity that, the protection provided by the facility that they are contained in, etc. But in every case limits are put on those arcs, so that those facilities, if a catastrophic accident were to take place again, even though it would be very unlikely, then there would be no damage to l VOl 13 fAG'4 ~.(i 11 . ' . ' Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 12 either private property or habitations or for that matter for government habitations, either residential or office, where people would be expected to remain over an extended period of time, several hours. Excluding just transient traffic. There is no safety arc now or, in view of the fact that safety arcs would not change appreciably even with the development program, if it were approved, there is no arc now or in the foreseeable future that would extend into private property, private habitations, anything other than the waterway surrounding Indian Island. So it would be very unlikely that we could effect, even with the most unimaginable accident, Port Townsend, Marrowstone, Hadlock, or any of the nearby residences. Chairman Dennison: Okay, now when I talk about accidents, I don't necessarily mean to limit that to accidents within an ordnance magazine or whatever you call those. Of major concern to myself, and I think a lot of other people are possibility of mishandling that would result in say water pollution, or ground water pollution, or something to that effect. Do you have any information? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Well, again the danger from explosion would be negligible. Chairman Dennison: And I think that probably the least of peoples worries because we.... Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: As far as other pollution. Again, I think the safety procedures, the damage control precautions that are in place before any of our handling operations are started, even for the simplest ship board evolutions, you know, coming along side a pier, are such that it is very unlikely that that type of contamination could spread. Let me just point out a couple of things. The oil containment booms that we have in place, now almost throughout the Navy, any place a ship will be berthed, are there are the wharf, the pier at Indian Island. Those are deployed if we have an unexpected spill, again unlikely, but possible, and we do our best to contain that and recover any contamination that might be originated by the Navy. And our techniques are getting more and more modern. I won't deny we have had accidents from time to time but none that I can think of that have caused any amount of damage to the surrounding community or environment. Chairman Dennison: With the changes that are planned, programmed for Indian Island do you see any increased chance for accidents? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: No, I really don't. I would say that the possibility of increased traffic again, the main justification for approving these projects is the need, both now and in the future. The project that was approved in fiscal year 1988, the missile magazine, is a project that we need now. The improvements to the fire station, a project that we need now, .to improve our response times. And also looking to the future, the Third Fleet requirements to be in the north Pacific, Alaskan Gulf, eastern Pacific Ocean are growing enormously. You can read your newspaper just about every week now, certainly every month, where the Alaskan Air Command up there has intercepted yet another Soviet aircraft trying to breach our air space. We have Russian vessels off our coast almost on a daily basis. Our Third Fleet is going further and further north to protect our sea lanes up there and where are they going to go for their required maintenance, industrial and liberty support, here in puget Sound. So I haven't made it very clear that there will be an increase in traffic from the Third Fleet units that will visit the area as well as those that will be home ported here. But, again, viewing the safety records of those ships, the care that's taken to protect the environment, I see no relative increase in the potential for accidents or damage to the environment. Chairman Dennison: Even with the almost certain increase in traffic and, I mean when I say traffic, vessel traffic, and I would assume that there must be some land transportation. I don't know whether there's any land transportation of ordnance, but certainly there's got to be... tvOL 13 rAGE o,~ . . . , Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 13 Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Hopefully there'd be less if we get some of the facilities that we have planned now approved. I'll cite a case in point, missile magazines designed to house containerized missiles. By containerized I mean they're assembled as an integral weapon and containing a protective nousing, shipped and stored that way. Currently we have no magazines that have the capacity right now to house those magazines, so as a result, house the missiles, as a result we have to truck, which I'm sure you're aware of, that type of ordnance from as far away as Seal Beach California or Concorde California, creating a lot of truck traffic in the area. Given the opportunity to ho~se those over a longer period of time, I would envision less traffic in that case. But again, that would depend on fleet needs. It would depend on the situation in the north Atlantic. I can envision times when we need much more ordnance than we do now. Hopefully we'll never approach that point. I don't want to ____ but it's, it would be contingent on fleet requirements which are unpredictable at this point, but still growing. Chairman Dennison: So basically we could say that, we're almost certain that because of the growing importance of the Third Fleet presence in the north Pacific, that there will be more traffic and that as far as land transportation is concerned that depends pretty much on the needs of the fleet. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: That's correct, that would depend on the needs of the fleet, which at this point are growing. As far as land transportation from private residence, private military or civilian employees, no significant expansion there either. Again, I would give an example being a recent visit of the Constellation's Battle Group. I don't know how many were able to come down to Seattle to see that, but it was probably the most significant ship visit we've had in the puget Sound region since the Korean war and it's the sign of things to come. The Constellation, the New 3ersey that was there also, and the ships that were supporting them, were exercising in the region on routine operations and use the Seattle Port of Call as a liberty stop for some on the way back from a deplOYment, for others on the way out to deployment, but in any case it taxed our resources. Mine esgecially, because we were involved in the planning for the media relations program. I think the most significant incident we had in the entire visit of 8,500 sailors and five ships, was the fact that one of our ships failed to acknowledge a salute rendered to it by one of the commercial vessels that transited the puget Sound when the ships came in. That's a breach of maritime custom. Again, I think the quality of our fleet and our personnel is at an all time high. We pride ourselves in our safety record and the ability to take care of our surrounding environment. Chairman Dennison: So, that, what I'm hearing is that that wasn't a significant breach but at the same time it probably had, it must have had to do with some error somewhere, either technical or human. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Human error, it was a breach in protocol. Chairman Dennison: One question that I have in my mind that I think is probably one of the most significant questions is, does the Navy feel that the projects on Indian Island are, let me put it this way, does the integrity of our national defense depend on these projects on Indian Island? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: That's a good point. One that I would probably close with, if you hadn't brought it up. I mentioned, not in a emotional ploy, in my script, that it is of the highest national security needs. The puget Sound region is becoming more and more important. The trade that's going on between here and the Asian Rim countries and the military force that's extended too. I think that we've always had a strong military here. Again, I mentioned the Forts that are spread throughout this area, and many that are still here. The Air Force and Army down in the Tacoma region as well as the Navy in this region, becoming more and more important. We have about 250 ships ~VOL 13 rACt Itll~=' 1.3 "C .' Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 14 in the Pacific Fleet. The Pacific Fleet extends from the western United States, or eastern Pacific all the way through almost to the Suez Canal, the Indian Ocean area, Persian Gulf, Arabian Sea. Those 250 ships under the command of Admiral Lyons, Commander at Sea, Pacific Fleet Hawaii, are compared to about 600 that are in the Soviet Union's Pacific Fleet. We're severely out numbered, but we feel our edge in quality is still kept us in parity or better than the Soviet Fleet. But, we can't sustain level of operations for long without more support facilities and now, more of a presence in the northern Pacific where much of our attention is being diverted. So, if you look at the importance of the Pacific region in it's entirety, which include countries like Viet Nam, the Philippines, the Soviet Union, those countries, being as important in the strategic equation as they are, even though they're far away, are still linking with this Pacific Rim and we're part of the Pacific Rim. Chairman Dennison: I understand those things, but my question is, I mean the question that I'm leading to is, there is no alternative to Indian Island? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: There is an alternative and that's been identified in the scoping letter, I believe, through the .environmental assessment. The preferred alternative is, of course, to go ahead and build the selected projects that I've outlined. The other alternative is no project at all. And the Navy would have to look elsewhere for its' support. But, I've mentioned you have one of the best on-load, off-load ammunition handling wharfs in the entire west coast, right here in the puget Sound. Right across the bay. And it makes sense to make some modest improvements to that to meet the growing fleet needs that we are obviously not able going to, we're not going to be able to avoid them. We need to do it here. It's not the only alternative, but its the best alternative that we have. Most costs effective and strategically the most important. So, I would still say without question, its a very important part about the, of the overall national defense interests. And you are playing a part of that. Chairman Dennison: Okay, well my question, more or less goes beyond that. The question is, does the integrity of our national defense depend on Indian Island? I, you know the, the reason I asked that question is, ah..... Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Okay, in the holistic sense, you know the overall, whole person concept, yes it does. For lack of the proper regional support facilities in this area, we cannot sustain the level of operations we have now, or anticipate in the near future. That obviously is going to effect the rest of our fleet in a negative sense and in general detract from our defense posture. I can't say that the focus of our national defense strategy is right here on Indian Island. No. But.... Chairman Dennison: No, that's not what I meant. Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: It's a very, very important part of our growing regional needs. I can say that very clearly. Chairman Dennison: Okay, can you speak to what other options there are for -- what the alternatives to Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: I really can't because I don't know. The only option that I do know of is no development program. Again, not being a planner, I .don't know what other options t~e planners made. . Chairman Dennison: Okay, so in effect really, we can say that, the reason I ask is because generally, and especially, like for instance when we deal with this deferred, or the U.S. Forest Service Plan for Management of the Forest in the State of Washington. We have a range of options that start with no action, all the way through the entire spectrum and as a result, then those are each played off of each other ~VOL 13 rAGE 11:='-' 1.4 ," .' . , Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 15 and the policy making process depends on having that range of alternatives. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Right, granted its either a Go or No Go choice that we have here for Indian Island. We have wider ranges of options in other military construction projects, such as Everett. Everett had one more, had three alternatives. Either Everett, which was the preferred solution; Seattle, which was the secondary solution; or no project at all. Those were the only feasible alternatives. Here, and again I thinks it's because the uniqueness of the facility at Indian Island, we can't see at this point in time any feasible option, . other than building here. Chairman Dennison: But, other options have been looked at or not? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Again,.I don't know. I can look into that if you like. Chairman Dennison: George, do you have any questions here? Commissioner Georae Brown: I was wondering, ah, of course it's too early to tell, how many personnel would,be hired at Indian Island, if this proposed, the Navy goes ahead with this proposed... as I gather it right now, about $10 million that you're going to spend there, in the immediate future. Any idea how many personnel that you'd be hiring there? Not saying anything about your Marines or anything. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: No, I really don't and here again, it's probably part of the planning process that I'm not intimately familiar with. It will depend on the number of projects approved. Commissioner Georae Brown: And you did mention roads, but no mention of schools, dockward schools, but that'll probably come anyway. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Again, that would be part of the, I think, the dialogue that would go on between the County and the Navy further on down the road, once we identify which projects have been approved, which ones we can start construction on. We can better identify the number of additional hires that we would have there, both military and civilian and the dependent population, and subsequent impact on the communities. But, really, truly, it's still early to tell that kind of detail right now. Chairman Dennison: There's been some indication that there will be a need for, and I've heard anywhere from 150 to 200 Marines stationed at Indian Island as result of these first two phases. Is that correct? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: Well, I think, again risking providing misleading information or information that's not entirely accurate, I think the maximum number of jobs that would be created there, both military and civilian, would possibly approach 200 not exceed it, as I know. The exact mix of military and civilian, I'm not sure of, but ah. . Chairman Dennison: There are plans to have a, what do you call it a contingent of Marines or what? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke and Commissioner B.G. Brown: A detachment of Marines. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Again, there would be, as part of the long range plans for some of the projects, that possibility, however it would depend on the projects that are approved. The man power plan is directly linked to the projects that are approved. That is a possibility. Chairman Dennison: Well, I'm curious because I, you know, as far as I know now there are no Marines stationed at Indian Island. And I assume that it plays a fairly significant role in the overall operation of Keyport and Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and so I guess my main question lVOL 13 tAtE I~~~ 1.5 " " Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 16 is if there are going to be Marines there, is there any particular reason why, or is it just the number of weapons stored? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: I think you have to understand first of all the function, the mission of Marines in the United States Navy. They've got a couple of missions, you may know the Fleet Marine Force (FMF) those are the Marines that deploy with our ships. The amphibious craft that would be used to assault beaches. And other Marines that are used exclusively for security. Protection of our installations and facilities within those installations. The situation here would be a detachment of Marines that would be there to provide security for existing facilities. As for as the reason for change, you also have to keep in mind that what we're asking for .is growth significantly beyond what we have there now. Again, we do not have the capacity in our magazines or the ability of some of our operation facilities there to handle the inventory that many of our ships carry in weapons or provide them with the frequency that we might be required if the ships come in, as we expect them to come in, in a higher frequency. So we're, we need to expand. We need to have more facilities, a broader inventory of ordnance and, I can say that the Marines would be used to provide security for those existing facilities within the compound. Chairman Dennison: That makes sense. It sounds to me like that it has to do with increased activity and increased inventory as you.state, which kind of leads me back to another question. I don't want to belabor it all, but it seems like if we're talking about that much of an increase then we may be talking about more significant impacts than we had originally talked about earlier in this questions session, but I don't really want to get into that at this point. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: The other thing I wanted to point out -- we've talked a lot this morning about the unload, off load from ships but Indian Island also has the capability to refurbish the ordnance that they receive and store there. So, we're talking about a lot of operations on the Island itself, in addition to the handling wharf. Chairman Dennison: That happens now, is that correct? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: To a limited extent. Chairman Dennison: Those weapons that are, the ordnance that is handled there now is, there is also the capability of refurbishing those? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: That's correct. A limited capability of doing that. Again the explosive operating facility that we programmed for the '88-'89 budget would be to improve our capabilities in that area. Right now we're very limited.. Chairman Dennison: Can you tell me, what is, is there a most hazardous activity when one is doing the things that they do on Indian Island? I mean is there, handling, storage, what? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Probably on a morning like this, driving to work. Driving to work on an icy road would probably be the most dangerous. Again, I'm not an expert in ordnance handling, but I know enough to know that the, the techniques employed and the safety precautions that are employed, make it very safe. I think you can witness that from the relatively few accidents that the Navy's had. Okay? Chairman Dennison: Umhum, ah, I just noticed that your tape went off, and I know that you want to keep a record of this. If you have another tape. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: I've got a spare. Chairman Dennison: Okay, we'll just take a few minutes for you to load that. I had hoped that we could be done in an hour, but I and I appreciate the fact that you could stay for awhile longer. ~VOL 13 rAGE tJJ" 1.6 !., Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 17 Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: If it's agreeable, I'll put it in. Chairman Dennison: I have some questions that residents, residents in the immediate area of Indian Island were concerned about asking about what is proposed and one of those is would there be an expansion or extension of the restricted zone as a result of the activities that are planned? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: No, again we envision no appreciable change to the explosive safety arcs that are there now and the restricted zone, I'm not sure of the exact correlation, but we don't see any, any change to that zone or the explosive arc as a result of the proposed projects. Chairman Dennison: Okay, so... Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: As I understand it, correct me if I'm wrong, but the restrictive zone would be primarily the federal property on the Island itself and the surrounding beaches. Chairman Dennison: Yeah, I think there was like a 600 foot restriction out into the water. Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: I know they control that area of the bay but ah.. Not that I know of, I'll let you know if there is any change to the restrictive zone. Chairman Dennison: And the reason, the reason is because the person that asked me to ask that said that they were under the impression that at Bangor, for example, there was a significantly larger restricted zone than we have at Indian Island, and they were concerned as to whether or not that would deny access to certain areas or impede access or whatever. Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: There is a, probably more restrictive measures employed over there, but I don't think you, you can't compare the two facilities. Chairman Dennison: Okay, ah, this is going to be a difficult question to answer, but obviously one of the concerns around here as far as impacts, social impacts are concerned is ah, well, beside the fact that we, we, certain people expect jobs to be created, one of the things that comes to my mind is that that in itself creates some certain impacts. If jobs are created in 3efferson County then generally people in other areas around find out about that and are drawn here. Do you have any kind of information available that leads to any conclusions as to what the impacts of influx of workers are on these kinds of projects or what kind of impacts that has on the local population and its' service base. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Not at this time. Not an economic impact per set, a detailed economic impact. That would normally as part of the planning process, follow the environmental process. The Environmental Assessment or Impact Statement, and in many cases both the military and local government would do their own studies to ,come up with baseline figures. Chairman Dennison: And I didn't, I really didn't expect you to give me anything specific for this, but I think in general what I'm talking about is, in general do you have information that you've collected from projects in the past? The reason I bring it up is because the thing that comes to my mind is the experience in Alaska when the Alaska Pipeline was constructed and while there was an increase in emplOYment, their employment level was higher than it had ever been before. But, their unemplOYment rate was also the highest that it had ever been and the reason of course, was that there was this mad rush from the lower 48 to take up the jobs. ~VOL 13 fACf I[uc 1.7 . 0 Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 18 Lieutenant Commander Van Dvke: I think we're seeing the kind of situation that you are describing in Everett right now. We went through some great pains to do some economic, what we call "Fiscal Impact Analysis". The county and the City have done analyses also and the good news is that we're creating a tremendous economic impact statewide and regional wide for a very long period of time. Not only for the period of construction, but also an annual additional income which would be directly attributable to the Navy bringing in the industry and people. However, on the flip side of that, and people have pOinted out, the negative impacts. We have, I think its' slightly less than a one to one ratio of active duty military to dependents, so every military person that would come into the area, active duty, you can expect them to bring in slightly less than one dependent. That kind of a ratio. So, a lot of people point to that and say well yes, your going to c~eate extra jobs and bring in extra income, but you're also going to bring, be bringing in extra dependents who are going to compete with us for those jobs. That's true, but in cases I'm familiar with around Puget Sound the net gain is far greater that the loss you might have. Chairman Dennison: I'm thinking more in terms of construction project where you have, well for example, in the Alaska experience, what they found was that ah, the Tulsa locals got most of the pipeline jobs. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Yeah, okay. That's a valid point too. We've been very sensitive to that in Everett because it's a major construction project. We're talking about $272 million to get it to initial operating capability over there within the next two or three years. Of course, there's a lot of contractors in the area that have their eye on that contract. We have a facilities planning process that uses pUblic bid to advertise contracts from design to actual construction and very detailed process that scrutinizes the eligibility, and the capability of the contractors and we take the low bidder that's qualified to do that job which means there's a risk to the local contractors who may come in high. However, even in the case of prime contractors that might be outside the area, and I think in the case of Everett right now, most of our prime contractors are at least within the Washington, Oregon area, none beyond that, the prime contractor hires a number of subcontractors from the local area and we have no control over that. Obviously it would be to their advantage if they have the expertise available locally to use that so they den't have to bring people long and expensive distances. So I would say where you might want to focus your attention would be, if not on the prime contracts, then subcontracts under that, at the appropriate time. Again, we're too far from talking about that detail. Chairman Dennison: Yeah, see my main concern and it was realized too late in Alaska, was that their unemplOYment roles just burgeoned as a result of the project because people came with the expectation of working and when they couldn't, when they didn't, they ended up as wards of the State of Alaska. And, I'm not sure that the Navy or we or anyone has control over that. That's a situation where even if local people got all the jobs we still would have a certain responsibility. Anyway, I don't want to belabor that because I know that you, you, unless there are Navy studies that show those kinds of impacts then we're not going to be able to .... Lieutenant Commander Van Dvke: Again, none that I know of, but if I do uncover any studies I'll provide those as I can. But, I don't know of any that have been completed or even any that have been initiated at this point for the fiscal impact analysis. Chairman Dennison: Do you guys have any more questions? Commissioner B.G. Brown: There was a certain amount of that done when Bangor came to Kitsap County, because they knew the same guys that, the pipeline had happened prior to that so they did know some of those things and it was a portion of the impact statement for Bangor that did address the social and economic impacts. ~ VOL 13 fACE Ii" .... - 18 , ' , , Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 19 Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Well, if I can put it into perspective, I know tha~,I've learned a lot in this job itself about the military construction process and environmental planning. I have to admit even now with two years of this under my belt, I'm still confused at times. You have to put into perspective, I'll use Everett as an the example I'm most familiar with. The scoping process for Everett took place as far back and 1981-82. Detailed plans, and I guess an announcement that Everett would be an alternative, and they were trying to decide between Everett and Seattle at that time. There was an announcement made back in the fall of '84, that Everett would be the preferred alternative and Seattle was secondary alternative and the third, no alternative. That, I guess, more or less completed the scoping part of the planning and then we went into an Environmental Impact Statement process, which began, I think, back in early '84 and was completed just last year. We did not start the Fiscal Impact Analysis portion of that, let's say complete. We completed a Fiscal Impact Analysis, I believe it was late '85 or early '86, I'm not exactly sure of the dates, so it trailed the initial scoping process by a couple of years. And for Indian Island we're .still in the initial scoping and not even yet completed the environmental assessment process. So, in the natural order of things I would expect that this information would become available probably a year or more down the road. And most assuredly, when those types of studies are done, and I don't want to be accused of pulling out false assurances, I don't know what type or how many of those studies would be done. But, those that are initiated will, of course, involve County and local government. Chairman Dennison: George did you have any questions? (Indication of "No" from Commissioner George Brown.) I've got some questions, and I know you can't tell us whether or not you have nuclear weapons stored any place, but maybe you could tell us a little bit about the Navy's nuclear program as far as safety is concerned and those kind of things and well, have there been any accidents? Nuclear weapons that have released nuclear materials or had a nuclear reaction that you know of? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: I don't know of any. Not because perhaps there were not, but as you pointed earlier much of that information and perhaps I don't have the need to know, but I can say that it's public knowledge we claim a safety record that extends over thirty years, where there have been no weapons related accidents that have endangered the public in any way or resulted in a release of radiation that has endangered the public in any way. Chairman Dennison: Okay, if there had been an accident, could you tell us? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Yes, let me explain, now we're getting more into my field as the area coordinator ,for Naval Base Seattle Public Affairs. We would be a coordinator, a very important coordinator, there at Naval Base, in the event of an unlikely nuclear accident or incident and we have extensive plans that we work together with local government on or contingencies; Civil Defense, disaster preparedness, emergency response and even military support to local government where its necessary. I don't know who, if anybody within 3efferson County government, coordinates with the military. In this region the Army is the principal military service to coordinate civil, support civil disaster and defense and then the Navy and the Air Force would be called upon as appropriate to assist, but I'm sure that somebody within government has a liaison with the County Civil Defense or military to prepare for those contingencies. Chairman Dennison: Did have, we don't right now. Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: Well, ah, but then there is, I should point "out some exceptions to the neither confirm or deny policy. I can think of two exceptions to that policy. One would be in the event of a real world accident, where we endanger public safety. We would, of course, make the appropriate public announcement in that instance or in the event of Wide-spread public alarm that we need to quell to preserve public safety. You know a mass exodus from a specific region. We : VOL 13 fAGE lrD~~ 19 t. Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 20 could confirm or deny if we had nuclear weapons present. So, yes we do have safeguards and exception to the rule to work with local government in the event of an accident. Chairman Dennison: Kind of after the fact. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Hopefully not, and again I'm not going to stick my neck out too far and say we have a wonderful relationship with local government planners, but we do have systems in place to plan for that. And, also we coordinate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Region 10 is headquartered over here in Bothell. They work with State, Federal, local government to coordinate those kind of plans. And they exercise quite frequently. Chairman Dennison: This is one that I don't know that you can answer, but ah, it's a hypothetical, if, it's really all that we can deal with, obviously hypothetical, but if there were nuclear weapons stored at Indian Island, would they be transported, would nuclear materials be transported by, via County roads? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: Okay, I couldn't confirm or deny that either. That's kind of narrowing the field. You know what I mean? Chairman Dennison: Yeah, yeah, but obviously that gives us great concern since we're not only responsible for health and safety, but we're also responsible for those County roads.out there. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Yes sir, I understand. Chairman Dennison: Is there a Commissary or PX on Indian Island? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: There is what we call a mini Exchange. It's not a large department store as you might see at Whidbey Island or Sand Point, but there is an Exchange, not a Commissary, at Indian Island. Chairman Dennison: Do you know, if there are more military personnel planned for the Island would there be an expansion of that? Obviously what I'm leading to is, one of the economic questions in peoples minds is if we have more people out there then we get more of.a benefit among our local merchants and that needs to be buffered by the fact that most military installations and certainly all military, all active and most retired military personnel have access to commissary and base Exchange. Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: I know of no planned expansion of any of the Exchange facilities there, just the ones I've mentioned on the military ammunition side of the house. Chairman Dennison: Okay, in your opinion, with the Navy's facilities in, at Bangor and Puget Sound Naval Shipyard available so close and Silverdale, would you expect any increase in base personnel would really have much or a large impact on local retail sales. In other words what I'm saying is that I, and I don't, and again, it kind of goes back to whether there are any Navy studies in history that show what buying habits are. But, see these are the concerns of people who have economic questions and I think it's important for us to address those things as up front as we possibly can, because people often times are wooed by the idea that more people equals more dollars in the local economy. I. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: I'm uncertain of the relative impact it would have, of course, expanded military population by two or the civilian population by two, is there a doubling effect on economic impact in the area? I don't know. Overall I would anticipate a very, relatively small impact just because of the relative size of the projects in the military construction budget. I mean, as you saw in the papers this week, the President is asking for over a trillion dollars in budget and $60 million or $30 million or whatever the figure is, is a very small part of that. But, I don't know of and I don't think anybody's analyzed the relative effect here within the County or " VOL 13 rAGt., ~,Q. 20 <~ Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 21 surrounding region. I can comment, if it helps any, on buying habits for military personnel. I think the savings that can be gained by shopping at the military PX's or Exchange or Commissary systems is renown. I keep reading studies that the Navy puts out that I like where I could save up to 20% on the dollar if I shop exclusively at the Exchange or Commissary. But, what they don't take into account is the long line that you have to wait in, many days to get in there and many military families avoid that just for that reason and would rather shop on the economy. Chairman Dennison: The question is the value of the 20%. Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: That's right. Is it worth that much inconvenience, because we're also competing now with the retired and reserve community as well as the active duty, so again, I don't, I can't comment on specific impact but I would caution to stop short of assuming that the military families that come into the area would shop exclusively at the Navy Exchange or Commissary system. Chairman Dennison: Base housing. Will military personnel be housed on the base or? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: No increase in base housing is being predicted as far as this development program. Chairman Dennison: Okay, no idea of impacts on local services, schools, ah ... law enforcement is a big one? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: No, other than that the housing would have to be absorbed by the local economy. Chairman Dennison: Law enforcement a big one for us because we're, as all local government, severely impacted by the cut back in federal Revenue Sharing and other revenues at the same time... Lieutenant Commander Van Dvke: See its' a different fleet nowadays though. Everybody's well behaved out there. Chairman Dennison: Right, and I guess one of my major concerns is not necessarily Navy personnel, you know, when we talk about impacts we just have, there are all kinds of things that we might look forward to. Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: I don't mean to make light of that. That is one thing that the military looks at, assistance of law enforcement. I know in most communities where there's a large Navy presence, local law enforcement almost welcomes the Navy law enforcement branches. The help they get from them is great. Great cooperation. Chairman Dennison: So in this case could we expect an increase in military law enforcement? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: Well, again other than ah, the security personnel that would be associated with the proposed projects, No. And of course our jurisdiction only extends to the federal property anyway. And at that point we work together with the County and City to have some sort of liaison between those two jurisdictions. Chairman Dennison: One of our real concerns, and certainly mine, is that ah, and we're going through this right now, as a matter of fact as soon as this is over we've got to make some quick decisions here on our Emergency Management Plan. Now, right now we have only an Acting Director and this is what I was alluding to awhile ago when you mentioned, you were saying that there was someone that was responsible for emergency response and coordinating with the military. We have an Acting Emergency Management Director and a volunteer Emergency Management Coordinator, who happens to, at this moment, be "in school in Portland trying to learn what its' all about. So right now we have concerns well number one, about our ability to respond and number two about really the lack of any real coordination with the Navy, currently ~VOL 13 rACE l:O 21 ","1 - , Board Of Commiss.ioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 22 and perhaps you can shed some light on what the future might hold with respect to emergency response? Because I'm sure that the likelihood of the necessity of a response would increase with increased activity. Lieutenant Commander Van Dvke: Well, I think you have a valid point there. As a point I made earlier, you know we have a valid meeting now and we see a growing need in the future. And I think we can compare that to your need now to know what to do in the event of an accident over there, how we work together, and I would not mind at all taking that one on and discussing it with my counterparts back in the staff and perhaps provide you information on response to an accident and cooperation with civil authorities and the military. Chairman Dennison: FEMA offered us 20~ of the salary of an individual. Our problem is that where do we get the 80~. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: If you will, when you provide me with your list of unanswered questions, maybe specify that you'd like an answer now and also an answer on how that's going to change in the future. Chairman Dennison: I have some questions as to, now I know the Navy doesn't pay like Sales Tax on projects and things like that. For example when the Hood Canal Bridge was built, we got sales tax. We got a flush of sales tax from that project. So the Navy does or does not pay any local or well any taxes on projects and how, and how, is there any off set for that? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Again, that is outside my area, but I know there is Federal Impact Aid offset, what they call offset aid for certain impacts like schools and highways, but as far as construction, what you call B & 0 taxes, none that I know of other than the sales taxes and property taxes that someone living on the economy would normally pay. Chairman Dennison: Island is adjacent concerns expressed Island. These are end. Now, there are some, you know that Marrowstone to Indian Island and again, we've, I've had some by property owners and residents of Marrowstone my questions by the way, so we're getting near the Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: Yes sir. as you need too. That's fine. Stay as long Chairman Dennison: Light and glare. Do you expect there to be any more, any need for expensive lighting at night or glare producing things that you know of? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: None that I know of. Again, that would be part of the Environmental assessment. We would evaluate the impact of everything from air quality to lights. I'm relatively confident to say that it would be no alarming increase of light glare. There may be a few extra lightening arresters, which extend pretty high in the air. But, most of what's being constructed would be shielded by the vegetation, geography, topography of the island, Indian Island now. Chairman Dennison: There's a road that, just as you come across the bridge that veers to the right, and access Marrowstone Island and ahm, people have some real concerns that if Indian Island is going to play an increasing role in this Third Fleet development, is there going to be a need to cutoff that access road and if so, what? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: No plans that I know of to restrict, again, that probably gets into the restricted zone question. Nothing that I know of that's going to further restrict or impede the public uses of the lands that are there now. Chairman Dennison: Not a Marine barricade there? Don't answer that. , VOL 13 fACE t.]. 22 .' f ,--J Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 23 Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: No. That would be part of the construction project, I'm sure, and they're going to rely primarily on the gates that are there now and the guard houses. Chairman Dennison: You mentioned Federal Aid to the schools and I had just recently read somewhere that that aid is no longer available. Do you have? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: I don't know, I've probably read the same reports that you have. I've not gone any further than that. It's tough, again, in this fiscal climate when we're all taking cuts. Chairman Dennison: Okay, to go one step further, would the Navy be willing to make a written commitment that the people on Marrowstone Island are not going to get cut off? Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: Probably not. Chairman Dennison: You see there's some considerable concern. Obviously there you can almost throw a rock across Scow Bay there from Marrowstone to Indian Island. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: You say a written commitment. Perhaps something in the form of a letter that expresses our current and future plans as far as we can see them, but as far as some legal document I'm doubtful that that would be forth coming. But, again, I'll be glad to research that for you. Chairman Dennison: Please do because I know that there are some real concerns among the Marrowstone residents. Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: I'll take that as a questions and get back to you. That'll be a legal question instead of a public affairs question. Chairman Dennison: Gentlemen, are there any other questions? Commissioner B.G. Brown: I don't have any further questions. Chairman Dennison: I can only say again that trust obviously is a major determinant in any kind of relationship and the major determinant of trust is information and honesty and I'm not saying that I doubt your honesty for one minutes but unfortunately information is a real key thing there and so I guess my last question would be what assurance can the Navy give us that we can have a good relationship if we can't have the information on the issue that are, at least in the minds of most of the folks around here, the most important? Lieutenant Commander Van Dyke: Okay, I think first of all by knowing where to find us. We're accessible, busy perhaps and sometimes unavailable to appear when you need us but certainly available to approach. If you have those kind of concerns, let me know or your nearest Navy official know about those concerns and I would say, put it in writing when you need to. I would also work through your Congressional delegation. They're really the oversight. I'm in the military, but I'm also a private citizen and I elect my public officials just like everybody in the room, hopefully, does and when I need help I've used the Congressional route before. I think that's certainly your opportunity as well as the private citizen out here in 3efferson County. We work very closely with Congress and as I've pointed out many times, we depend on them for the authorization and appropriations and the funds that we need for these projects. And certainly they are empowered to investigate any complaints that you might have about the relationship that, up to now, I think we've enjoyed. I would exercise that option if the Navy officials failed to respond in the appropriate way. I can't think of anything more piercing than a Congressional investigation, so I'll leave you with those two recommendations and I think that'll work. Chairman Dennison: Okay. ~ VOL 13 fACEt. ~~O 23 _t.- . . '" ~ ., Board Of Commissioners' Meeting: Minutes of 3anuary 5, 1987 Page: 24 Lieutenant Commander Van DYke: I'd just like to close with, you know, reiterating our commitment to this region. Again, we're residents just like everyone around me is a resident. I take my uniform off when I go home and I, hopefully, melt into the community. And I'm as concerned, and I know the people I work within the Navy are as concerned about our environment as you are. And, I think the people here at Indian Island are good examples of the good stewards that we try to be. We take care of the property, the land that we have in our jurisdiction. Trust, I think is a very important ingredient. Actually we're asking you to depend on our word, in some cases here, and in some matters that are very critical, very emotional. As you read my biography, I attended the Naval Academy and there they teach the honor concept. Very simple. You don't lie, you don't cheat, and you don't steal and there's no exceptions. And I've lived with that since my Academy days and before and I wouldn't be in this institution if I could not exercise that kind of an ideal, and I didn't see that kind of an ideal reflected in the people that work around me and the leadership that I'm following. Granted our government, and trust in public government has taken a hit over the past few years, but I'd like to think that we're on the road to restoring that and when we say that we pledge our utmost in support to you, you can count on it. And; I know I speak for my leadership when I say that. So, again, I appreciate the opportunity to be here to present our side of the story, which up to now has been I think discussed largely through media channels, and I hope we've come to a better understanding. But, let's continue the dialogue as is appropriate and thank you very much. Chairman Dennison: Thank you Mark and I really appreciate the crowd a lot. I didn't know exactly what to expect and I pulled out a gavel for the first time in my entire political career and I am really pleased that I didn't have to use it a single time. I didn't even hear anybody sneeze, so you are to be highly commended and I thank you very much. Lieutenant Van Dyke: I appreciate your courtesy also. 3EFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSI Chairman SEAL ,~ . . . , B.G~ber /-( .. ~. George C. . own, Member -,. .. d '\,; . VOL 13 rAGE 11r. 24