PENDING  CHANGES  TO  USEPA  POLICY  ...   by Michael Glaab

Recently CQ Weekly published an informative and pertinent article about pending environmental remediation policy changes that may significantly impact the environmental cleanup effort at Picatinny Arsenal. Entitled EPA Takes Aim at Pentagon Pollution this article was prepared by Ms. Rebecca Adams and it appeared in the March 23, 2009 issue of CQ Weekly whose website is at www.cq.com. This article refers to the recent assumption by Ms. Lisa Jackson of the administration of the USEPA and it discusses the administrative policy changes which she is expected to implement.

For example, since a significant portion of Picatinny Arsenal is contaminated with TCE ( trichloroethene/trichloroethylene) the following expectations cited in the article are most pertinent to the Arsenal which is sited above three water aquifers and occupies approximately 6,491 acres of Morris County, New Jersey:

· The USEPA may revise standards for trichloroethene:

        “...the EPA may update the standards for Pentagon-generated substances it counts as hazardous pollutants. Agency officials

        are considering setting tougher standards under the Safe Drinking Water Act for the types of chemicals that military bases

        often produce. Among the substances under consideration are trichloroethylene…”

Perhaps mindful of such organizations as the PAERAB the article referred to the participation of activist groups in the cleanup process and the efficacy of current legal instruments used to implement environmental remediation policy: 

· According to the article Mr. John Reeder, an official of the USEPA, “… has stepped up his inquiries to state officials and interest groups about how the agency can strengthen various cleanup laws pertaining to military installations”. The following direct quote was attributed by the article to Mr. Reeder: “The dynamic has changed now...”

· Referring to the USEPA, the article stated that the “...agency may ask Congress to update federal laws to make it clear that the EPA has the final authority to set cleanup requirements…”

· Apparently referring to events in 2008 when the Department of Justice acted to resolve a dispute between the Department of Defense (DoD) and the USEPA the article reaffirmed the legal jurisdiction and purview of the USEPA with the following statement:

        “...the Bush administration’s Justice Department confirmed in December that the law requires the Pentagon to comply with

        EPA cleanup orders.”

The article continued with discussion of the military’s prioritization of the cleanup of its own contaminated facilities:

· Although the  "...Defense officials have proposed military exemptions from more than half a dozen environmental laws affecting air quality, water quality, hazardous waste..." recent events appear to indicate that environmental cleanup will be accorded a higher priority. For example:

        “In February, Wayne Arny the deputy undersecretary of Defense for installations and environment, told the EPA that the

        Pentagon would start negotiating the superfund cleanup controls that it contested last year. Earlier this month, the Navy    endorsed two

        previously disputed agreements...".

Especially relevant to Picatinny Arsenal, the article elaborated with the following thought provoking statement concerning those facilities, such as the Arsenal, which contain firing ranges and munitions sites:

·       Mr. “...John Reeder, an EPA official who oversees cleanups at federal facility sites, says he now plans to develop new

                strategies for cleaning up munitions sites, such as abandoned firing ranges where explosives were used … ".

Will the Obama administration allocate additional funds for cleanup? The financial cost of a potential remedial action alternative is deemed by the Army to be a crucial determinative factor when comparing and assessing different possible remedial action alternatives for any particular site. Therefore, the amount of funding available for environmental remediation and the anticipated cost of cleanup are vital factors in determining which remedial action alternative will finally be selected to cleanup a site. Discoursing on the overall cost of cleanup the article explained that approximately 10,000 sites under the Pentagon’s supervision still require remediation and that more than 3,400 of these are superfund sites. Citing a total of 31,487 DoD cleanup sites the article specified that of these 9,852 have not yet achieved their remediation goals. The article elaborated with the statement that during the Bush administration the “...Pentagon spent an average of about $2 billion per year, or less than 0.5 percent of its annual budget, on environmental restoration”.