Nanoose Bay - Let's Get The Facts Straight

As this is written, the Province of BC is engaged in a dispute with the federal government over the latter's expropriation of the sea-bed used by the Canadian Forces Maritime Experimental and Test Ranges (CFMETR) located in Nanoose Bay on the east coast of Vancouver Island, north of Nanaimo. The media is reporting only one side of the story, so we would like to provide some observations which warrant study. But first, some background.

In 1965, Canada and the US jointly established and agreed to share use of the CFMETR in Nanoose Bay. In 1986, after years of safe, successful operation, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that sea-bed access in Nanoose Bay came under provincial government jurisdiction. The federal government was obliged to enter into a license agreement with BC, an agreement which opens for renewal every ten years.

All went well until 1996 when the BC government, for obvious political reasons, linked the Canada/US salmon fishery dispute to the negotiations for a new access lease for the use of Nanoose. In May of this year, Premier Clark added another issue to the negotiation process-announcing the lease would not be renewed unless the federal government gave assurances that nuclear-powered vessels, carrying nuclear weapons, would not use Nanoose.

Respecting the policy of the US, which for sound strategic reasons will not confirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons aboard US Navy ships or submarines, the Canadian government could not give such assurances. The BC government then served notice it would not change its plan to cancel the license, whereupon the federal government announced the commencement of expropriation of the Nanoose Bay sea-bed.

Environmental and pacifist groups, along with the Nanoose Conversion Campaign Committee, have now joined the battle. They have appeared as "objectors" at the expropriation hearings. This has resulted in a wealth of misunderstanding and misinformation receiving media attention.

The Expropriation Act does not provide for the appearance of those who support the action of the Canadian government. One might ask therefore, how we ensure the Chairman of such hearings, or for that matter the general public, obtains accurate, objective information concerning the importance and operation of the CFMETR facility.

The following represents pertinent factual information the media has conveniently overlooked:

• CFMETR is an important test facility for both Canadian and US Navies. Operations focus on torpedo, sonobuoy and underwater testing. The test range has been accident free throughout its existence.
• The BC government, environmental and pacifist activists, including the Nanoose Conversion Campaign Committee, claim the presence of nuclear-powered vessels carrying and testing nuclear weapons in the Nanoose Bay area, constitute a danger to residents in the Nanaimo area. They argue CFMETR should be closed and converted into a non-military complex.
• Nuclear-powered vessels have, and likely will continue to use, the CFMETR. Nuclear weapons have never been, or never will be tested at Nanoose Bay. Also, no devices with warheads of any nature, nuclear or conventional, have been tested on the range.
• Objectors conveniently fail to mention the fact that in 1992, the US Navy announced that tactical weapons had been removed from all their surface ships and attack submarines. The USN's Fleet Ballistic Submarines (Ohio-class SSBNs) are part of the US strategic defence force. They are armed with 24 long-range strategic missiles. Each SSBN has four torpedo tubes for the Mk. 48 torpedo, high-explosive (HE) warhead. Eight SSBNs are home-ported in Bangor, Washington, while there are nine on the East Coast at Kings Bay, Georgia.
• SSBNs operate on a 2/3 at-sea-rate. They have two crews alternating on 70 day patrols, interrupted by a 25 day refit period. There is a proposal to reduce the crew staffing by one, resulting in a 1/3 at-sea-rate. More info can be found on http://www.nav.mil.
• The USN has approximately 65 nuclear-powered attack subs (SSNs) in service. They carry the Mk. 48 torpedo or variation thereof, with HE warheads. Certain SSNs carry Tomahawk missiles that can be used against surface or land targets, all armed with HE warheads.
• To suggest SSBNs are likely to be stationed at Nanoose for the purpose of testing torpedoes with nuclear warheads or missiles, is ludicrous. CFMETR is a torpedo testing facility. It is not a working-up area for ships or subs carrying nuclear weapons.
• Traffic to and from the test range is light. Two USN subs and six surface ships usually visit the range yearly. All are nuclear-powered. In over 30 years of operation, 246 USN surface ships and 162 subs have used the CFMETR. Six Canadian subs and 254 Canadian ships have visited the range, as has one Chilean, Oberon-class, diesel-powered sub.
• CFMETR tests 300 to 400 torpedoes annually. The Mk. 48 torpedo, the most common type tested, has a sophisticated guidance system permitting a variety of attack options. As it leaves the submarine launch tube a thin wire spins out, electronically linking the sub and the sonar system, initially to guide the torpedo to its target. Some of the testing equipment, e.g., copper wires and lead weights, cannot be recovered due to the nature of the tests. Environmentalists have complained about the acclaimed dangerous debris left on the sea-bed. A special environmental assessment report released in 1996 by the Pacific Marine Technology Centre in Victoria, stated the impact of this debris is minimal, largely because the high sedimentation rate and soft sediment in Nanoose Bay results in relatively rapid burial of the debris. The report emphasizes that release of contaminants into the sea and environment is very limited and perhaps negligible.
• A Greenpeace objector who appeared at the expropriation hearing is reported to have stated, "There have been more than 1200 documented accidents involving the world's five nuclear navies since WWII, many involving nuclear forces." Accidents attributed to the USN are few in number when compared to Russia and other countries. A list of US nuclear accidents compiled by Allen H. Lutins (see: http://www.nitehawk.com/alleycat/nukes.html), provides a breakdown of accidents at US facilities, including submarines and ships. The submarine/ship accident report lists a total of 11 incidents from 1954 to the last reported incident in 1978. Excluding the loss of the submarines Thresher and Scorpion, most of the incidents involved the discharge of radioactive coolant waters by ships, not submarines. In other words, all statistics should be viewed with care.

Press reports have all been one-sided. The media, which has essentially failed to take interest in the Nanoose Bay expropriation hearings, has failed to challenge the emotional and misleading outbursts of the objectors. Is it too much to expect that when the hearings resume in August, they will seek out and report the truth, providing the Canadian public with the essential and well-researched facts of this matter? We sincerely hope so.

(Originally Published in Vol. VII, No. 7, Summer Issue of Starshell)