Please see the December 13th article in the Pacific Daily News regarding the Programmatic Agreement regarding military training and testing on and within the surrounding waters of the island of Guam (PATT) below. https://www.guampdn.com/story/news/local/2020/12/13/guam-govguam-officials-new-military-agreement-not-happy/6527313002/

Please see Senator Therese Terlaje’s full statement to the media regarding the PATT below:

“While the proposed 2020 agreement is only 14 pages, the Appendix A is 96 pages long and contains important information regarding training activities and potential training areas that needs careful review.  Appendix B also proposes Standard Operating Procedures regarding the handling of human remains uncovered due to “any action, undertaking, or activity (including those caused by natural occurrences such as erosion) on DoD-retained lands on Guam”.  It is unclear if the language in the SOPs will be applied to any activity including clearing or construction, not just training and testing activities in this PA, which could possibly widen the scope of this proposed 2020 Programmatic Agreement to any uncovered human remains disturbed by the military. The SOPs must be reviewed thoroughly and compared to existing local reburial guidelines. We should not feel rushed into an agreement without complete confidence that it is in the best interest for the community.  

I am very concerned about the increased number of training areas in the proposed 2020 PA that were not included in the 2009 Programmatic Agreement.  At first glance it appears that 20 different training areas were identified outside of Anderson Air Force Base (which includes DanDan Malojloj, Camp Blas South, Nimitz Radio Barrigada, Piti Floating Mines, Agat Bay Mine Neutralization Site, Nearshore waters of NBG and other areas), and 7 training areas were identified inside Anderson Air Force Base.  The 2009 PA listed only Naval Base Guam (NBG) Main Base, portions of the Naval Ordinance Annex, 7 training areas within AAFB, and 5 training areas in Anderson South. Maps and descriptions of possible training activities were included in Appendix A of the 2020 PA, but the maps did not include a listing of known historic sites in and around the surrounding 27 proposed training areas.

In addition, the 2020 PA requires that the agreement be signed first, before JRM provides (GIS) documentation of sites identified as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP) and copies of all archeological survey reports available to DoD covering the eligible sites. (See Part A of Stipulation VII in the draft PA).  JRM has six months after the execution of the agreement to provide such information.  This survey information and documentation of historic sites should be provided upfront before the government of Guam agrees to any proposed training sites.  If the agreement is signed before it has complete information regarding its historic sites, it allows for “no further review or consultations under this PA” in all 27 proposed training areas and ultimately ties the hands of the State Historic Preservation Officer and the community from fully protecting our historic sites. 

I recognize some of the enhancements in this draft 2020 Programmatic Agreement in comparison to the 2009 PA such as the inclusion of annual meetings and public notice for trainings.  I will insist that any annual meetings be open to the public as I have insisted these last 4 years for the 2011 Relocation Programmatic Agreement annual meetings.  

I do not support a Programmatic Agreement with no expiration date.  While the agreement technically allows for termination at any time, it is in the best interest for the people of Guam to require cumulative studies of the impacts of training and testing and insist renegotiations based on data at least every 5 years.  This is the type of information the community and I have been asking for since the negotiations for this PA started two years ago and it is irresponsible to move forward with an agreement without a true assessment of impact and safeguards.  Training and testing activities include detonations, sonar, live fire, helicopter training, and other activity.  When these are done over our villages and in our fishing grounds and habitat, or in the vicinity of ancient burial grounds and cultural sites, these have growing cumulative impacts on Guam. The draft agreement fails to acknowledge cumulative impact.  Even the 2011 Relocation PA with all its faults acknowledged massive cumulative impacts, and included required mitigation such as the Repository, a Museum, publication of research and assistance to the SHPO’s office.  

The 2009 PA required field monitoring and report submission. We have yet to see reports of impacts from training under the MIRC and MITT from 2009 to 2020, and the negotiations on the new MITT was the opportunity to ensure past obligations were met and a true mechanism to ensure compliance in the future.  The former SHPO had ensured that meetings with DoD regarding the MITT were open, and my office set up working meetings with Guam Preservation Trust, the Attorney General, senators, and others in hopes of a unified Guam approach intended to collectively strengthen the SHPO’s negotiations. In the last several months, consultations stopped being public and the SHPO and DoD came to this draft agreement and now invite public comment after the fact, putting a huge burden on the people of Guam during the holidays to voice their concerns before an agreement is signed. We expect the SHPO to consult with the people of Guam before negotiating for us. It was disappointing that an extension of the prior MIRC/MITT agreement was granted without obtaining the information that had been required of the agreements all along.

The implications and consequences of entering into a Programmatic Agreement are enormous and must be scrutinized with extreme care and deliberation. Training stretches far off the bases into our villages, fishing grounds, and cultural sites almost daily and yet we continue to be in the dark as to which cultural properties are affected and what the true impacts are on our communities. 

We have seen time and time again the removal of ancient artifacts, latte, lusong and human remains because the agreements were not explicit about preservation in place or details regarding acceptable forms of mitigation. Guam must learn from its past errors and stop losing in negotiations. We must ensure that any agreements made going forward protect Guam’s remaining historic sites and precious resources for the Chamorro people and the residents of Guam.

I plan to ask the SHPO again to conduct meetings with the community, prior to signing the agreement, where he can explain the expanded training sites, the cultural sites impacted, and what the differences are with this new agreement.

I encourage all community members to submit comments and concerns before December 16th regarding the draft 2020 Programmatic Agreement to advance our efforts to protect our cultural and historical resources.”

Residents can view the draft PATT document at https://historicguam.net/project-title-training-area-selection/, where there is also an option to submit comments. Comments can also be emailed to guamshpo@gmail.com. The public comment window closes Dec. 16.