Erie, Pa.   -  During today’s U.S. Coast Guard public hearing on the proposed safety zones for live fire training practice in the Great Lakes, U.S. Rep. Phil English (R-Pa.) urged Coast Guard officials to relocate the proposed fire zones currently designated for Lake Erie.

“I would like to say right up front that I am unalterably opposed to the designation of a permanent, year round, live fire training zone in this area,” English said.  “While I recognize the need for Coast Guard weapons training in realistic conditions, permanently excluding recreational and commercial activities from a popular waterway for much of the year would seriously degrade the economic wellbeing and lifestyle of many of my constituents.”

Over this past summer, the U.S. Coast Guard announced plans to establish 34 permanent safety zones throughout the Great Lakes for live fire training exercises.  Four of the proposed safety zones would be located on Lake Erie; one of which would be six miles off of Walnut Creek, a popular area for fishing.  During today’s hearing, English, who fought to ensure a public meeting on the proposal, would be held in Erie, called on the Coast Guard to relocate the fire zones currently assigned to Lake Erie.  He cited concerns regarding the impact of the proposal on Erie’s local economy and stressed the need for the proper implementation of environmental and safety regulations to protect the health and well being of all of the Great Lakes.

“I commend the Coast Guard for responding to the concerns of the Erie community and facilitating this meeting,” English said.  “Area residents have long depended on Lake Erie for recreational and commercial activities and we need to ensure that this proposal will meet the economic needs and social interests of our community.”

**Copy of English’s written testimony follows:

Congressman Phil English
Statement Regarding Coast Guard Live Fire Zones
November 6, 2006

First, I would like to thank Admiral Crowley for scheduling this public meeting to discuss the Coast Guard’s proposal to establish permanent safety zones on the Great Lakes, where they can conduct live fire weapons training.  One of these zones would be six miles off of Walnut Creek, a popular area for fishing. 

I would like to say right up front that I am unalterably opposed to the designation of a permanent, year round, live fire training zone in this area.  While I recognize the need for Coast Guard weapons training in realistic conditions, permanently excluding fishing, recreational boating and commercial shipping from a popular waterway for much of the year would seriously degrade both the economic wellbeing and lifestyle of many of my constituents.  There is a great deal of open water in the Great Lakes.  I am confident the Coast Guard can find a more suitable location for a live fire zone or at the very least, limit live fire exercises to no more than 4-6 days per year, AND NEVER DURING FISHING SEASON!

Over this past summer, the U.S. Coast Guard announced plans to establish 34 permanent safety zones throughout the Great Lakes for live fire training exercises.  Four of the proposed safety zones would be located on Lake Erie.  In response to increasing public concern, the Coast Guard announced in September that it would conduct public meetings on the proposal.  However, the closest meeting for Erie residents was scheduled to be held on a weekday evening in Cleveland, Ohio.  The timing and location of the hearing, in my view, would have prevented many local residents from providing important input on the proposal.  This prompted me to write to Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen and request an additional meeting in Erie be added to the agenda.

I commend the Coast Guard for responding to the concerns of the Erie community and facilitating this meeting.  Local families and community members have long depended on Lake Erie for recreational and commercial activities, and tonight we will have the opportunity to share our views without having to make the two hour trek to Cleveland.  I fully understand the logistical effort required to organize and plan a public briefing such as this and greatly appreciate Admiral Crowley’s commitment to making it a reality.

I also want to commend the 7,700 men and women of the Ninth Coast Guard District for their daily commitment to the safety and security of more than 30 million people in the Great Lakes Basin.  “Coasties” on the lakes share in the responsibility for protecting 11 major ports, 13 nuclear power plants, 348 regulated terminals, 22 high capacity passenger vessels and ferries, and hundreds of locks, dams, bridges, and other critical infrastructure.  

In 2005, Ninth District Coast Guard units responded to 5,355 rescue missions, 500 hazardous spill responses and saved 880 lives.  Just last week, U.S. Coast Guard Station Toledo rescued a father and his 10 year old son after their vessel began taking on water and sank.

As part of this mission, Coast Guard personnel are sometimes required to exercise law enforcement responsibilities.  Unfortunately, this may occasionally require the use of firearms.  For many years, Coast Guard personnel have been equipped with side arms, rifles and the M-60 light machine gun.  Last year the Coast Guard decided to replace the M-60 with more modern M-240B, which shares the same ammunition and rate of fire as the M-60 but fires with improved accuracy and safety.  

Let me be very clear about one important point I made at the beginning of my testimony: while I recognize the M-240B requires crew training on the water for its safe and effective use, my primary responsibility is to the welfare of my constituents.  I will not compromise on any issue threatening the safety, health or well being of northwestern Pennsylvania.  I would oppose any live fire training on Lake Erie, regardless of location, that does not include extensive marine broadcasts, prior notification to mariners, radar and visual scans of the training area and the use of a safety boat to keep civilian vessels out of the target area.  I would also oppose live fire training unless it is conducted only in areas carefully evaluated to have the least effect on the shore, our Canadian neighbors and other users of the lake.  I believe the Coast Guard must limit the impact of live fire training on commercial shipping and recreational boaters.  I do not want to learn of charter boats forced to cancel excursions or ferries unable to make scheduled runs.

In addition, I remain concerned about the impact of live fire training on the fragile environment of the Great Lakes.  The Coast Guard must strike a proper balance between ensuring their personnel are properly trained and the environment is protected.  I am pleased that before any weapons were fired, the Coast Guard conducted a human and environmental risk assessment.  I have been informed that this study followed standard risk evaluation procedures and used “realistic worst case” assumptions.  For example, the risk was calculated universally assuming all rounds fired would be the largest rounds available and the maximum number of rounds required in any situation would be used.  The overall objective of this study was to evaluate potential risks to human and ecological receptors associated with expended small caliber munitions from Coast Guard live gunnery training.

Based on the results of this evaluation, the Coast Guard concluded the proposed training will result in no elevated risks for a freshwater system such as the Great Lakes using ”realistic worst case” assumptions, and further investigation is not recommended.  The evaluation further concluded that if typical rather than worst case assumptions were used, the predicted risk would be even less.

I disagree with the conclusion that no further investigation is needed and will insist that periodic environmental evaluations be conducted should live fire training be allowed anywhere on Lake Erie.  At a minimum, evaluations should be part of the Coast Guard and Environmental Protection Agencies cyclical reports on the marine environment.

Again, I want to thank Admiral Crowley for scheduling this meeting and now I would like to turn the time over to my fellow concerned citizens of northwestern Pennsylvania.

-30-