Editorial: Navy should fund independent Growler noise testing

  • Friday, March 15, 2019 2:52pm
  • Opinion

The secretary of the Navy’s decision to assign 80 percent of the EA-18G Growler carrier landing practice to Naval Air Station’s Outlying Field Coupeville, as opposed to the larger and busier Ault Field base, surprised some people who expected a compromise.

But the Navy held fast to its “preferred alternative,” identified following an exhaustive, though some claim flawed, process of studying, researching and gathering input from the community.

The record of decision cites congestion at the Ault Field base, which will still have four times the number of aircraft operations as OLF Coupeville. It explains that the Central Whidbey airfield is perfect for pilots to practice landing on aircraft carriers, one of the most difficult and dangerous maneuvers a pilot can make.

The decision states that the number of flights isn’t a departure from historic levels. All important factors in the decision.

The Navy’s decision not to conduct noise monitoring, however, has little rationale behind it.

The Navy relies on computer noise modeling, which looks at the average decibels over time and is pretty meaningless to the average person.

Island County Commissioner Helen Price Johnson pointed out that the Navy’s computer-generated models won’t, for example, help a builder to decide how much noise attenuation to put into a house.

The Environmental Protection Agency, Department of the Interior, U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen, local officials and activists all asked for “real-world” noise monitoring.

The U.S. Parks Service conducted acoustic monitoring on Central Whidbey and found the EIS “significantly under represented” noise levels.

Oddly, the record of decision states that the Parks Service monitoring supports the Navy’s models of noise estimates.

Perhaps Navy officials believe monitoring would be a pointless exercise. Perhaps they worry that the results might be misunderstood, or would stoke more resentment.

Perhaps they’re worried about what the results would show.

Whatever the reason, it’s not harmful to have more information.

For people living in the flight path, or local government making decisions on zoning, understanding the real-world spikes in noise is critical information to have.

The Navy, in moving forward with its preferred alternative, should fund independent and ongoing noise monitoring.

More in Opinion

Balkanizing the Rock: What distrust may lead to | Rockin’ a Hard Place:

I’m just back from a dream trip along the coast of Slovenia… Continue reading

Cartoon for July 13, 2019

Cartoon for July 13, 2019… Continue reading

Letter: Ask leaders to support bill for early-onset Alzheimer’s

Editor, There’s a bill coming up in Congress to assist the 200,000… Continue reading

Editorial: Freedom of information must apply to everyone

It’s fitting that the Freedom of Information Act was signed on the… Continue reading

Cartoon for July 10, 2019

Cartoon for July 10, 2019… Continue reading

Letter: It’s easy for an outsider to criticize Growler victims

Editor, I just had to respond to the letter in the South… Continue reading

Letter: What is climate change? The weather is changing

Editor, A response Mr. Gunther’s editorial question of June 26. I have… Continue reading

Letter: Sign stealers are not accomplishing anything

Editor, It has come to my attention that small fractions of Americans… Continue reading

Letter: DNC is failing to spotlight threat of climate change

Editor, The Democratic National Committee has thus far failed to agree to… Continue reading

Most Read