Judge says no to COER injunction

A federal court judge denied a group’s attempt to halt the Navy’s carrier landing practice at a field near Coupeville. U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Zilly filed his order today, ruling against Citizens of Ebey’s Reserve, or COER.

By Jessie Stensland • August 11, 2015 6:35 pm
An EA-18 Growler performs touch-and-go landing practice at Outlying Field Coupeville. A federal judge denied a request by the anti-noise group Citizens of Ebey’s Reserve to suspend practices until an EIS is completed.
An EA-18 Growler performs touch-and-go landing practice at Outlying Field Coupeville. A federal judge denied a request by the anti-noise group Citizens of Ebey’s Reserve to suspend practices until an EIS is completed.

A federal court judge denied a group’s attempt to halt the Navy’s carrier landing practice at a field near Coupeville.

U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Zilly filed his order today, ruling against Citizens of Ebey’s Reserve, or COER.

COER filed a preliminary injunction against the Navy earlier this year claiming that the noise from the EA-18G Growler is harmful to the health of those who live near the field.

“The court concludes,” Zilly wrote in his ruling, ”that plaintiff has not established a likelihood of success on the merits, has not sufficiently demonstrated that its members will suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction, and has not shown that the balance of equities or the public interest weigh in its favor.”

Officials at Whidbey Island Naval Air Station provided a brief statement.

“The Navy is pleased with today’s decision,” the Navy’s statement said.

“We will continue work on the Environmental Impact Statement that will analyze the possibility of bringing additional aircraft to NAS Whidbey Island.

“The draft version of that document is scheduled to be released to the public sometime next spring.”

Ken Pickard, a COER member and former president of the group, said COER will appeal the decision.

“It is a very sad day for America when the federal court allows the Navy to irreparably injure citizens in order to conduct its training,” Pickard said.

In his ruling, Zilly questions the 13 declarations from residents about the health affects of the jet noise as well as a noise study conducted by two experts.

“The Supreme Court has warned that courts should exercise caution when considering complaints of anxiety and stress related to government action in the context of NEPA challenges,” he wrote.

“Both of these expert reports and declarations fail to raise new information,” Zilly said.