DAILY YOMIURI ONLINE
You are here:

Main

Futenma report presents 2 runway options

The government on Tuesday released the report of a Japan-U.S. expert panel on a planned alternative facility for the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station in Okinawa Prefecture.

The report features two conflicting plans for runway layouts. One layout option is a plan agreed upon between Japan and the United States in 2006 to build two runways in a V-shaped formation, a plan that Washington still favors. The other option is a plan more recently advanced by Japan to build a single I-shaped runway.

The report also states the facility will be built by reclaiming land from waters off the Henoko district of Nago in the prefecture.

The report includes assessments of the two options in each of six areas: safety, cost, management, noise and other negative impacts on local communities, environmental considerations and length of construction periods.

The Japanese side's estimate shows that the I-shape option would require 25 percent less reclaimed land area, 10 percent less earth and sand and 3 percent less money than the V-shape option. It would also destroy coral and other environmental resources in a 20 percent smaller area.

But the I-shape option would take about nine months longer to build because a new design for the facility and revision of final environmental assessment results will take time.

Concerning flight paths, the report says all aircraft would fly over the sea to reach the V-shaped runways, but would fly over the ground when approaching the I-shaped runway from the northeast.

The Japan-U.S. expert panel had not reached an agreement on the specific flight paths of U.S. military aircraft. The report says the two sides will continue to discuss the point.

As residents of Okinawa Prefecture largely oppose the relocation to the Henoko district, the report took local concerns into account.

The report says the possibility of amending the plans cannot be ruled out, but that completion of the alternative facility must not be further delayed.

(Sep. 1, 2010)
You are here: