Does the Military Make A Good Neighbor?
25 February 2009
by Peter L. deFur, Ph.D.
Apparently some Representatives in Congress think the answer to the question posed by the title is something like “not always.” The House is deciding how to handle H.R. 672, introduced by Rep. Robert Filner (D, CA), and intended to force all military facilities to comply with national environmental laws without exception. The law would eliminate the practice of exempting facilities, programs or activities from environmental compliance.
Communities often have mixed relations with military bases in their communities and nearby. On the plus side is the possible improvement in infrastructure if, for example, the military requires better roads, and then there is the flow of funds that accompanies the personnel. The down side can be the environmental damage left behind if base operations were not or are not up to current environmental standards. Obviously, some in Congress want to be sure that current and future military are at least as protective as industrial operations should be.
Military installations have reputations for dirty operations and contamination left behind. A few years ago, when the Military Toxics Project was active, the staff compiled a list of all the contaminated sites under the jurisdiction of the military, and created a map of all the sites, not electronic, to my knowledge. The list exceeded 35,000 sites, more than 30 times the number of contaminated sites on the National Priorities List (NPL) of Superfund sites. Some military sites are on the NPL, others are more private than military, as was the Avtex Fibers in Front Royal, VA that manufactured materials for the military. All are part of a legacy that needs attention.
Some of the most complex and largest Superfund sites are military bases, such as the former Fort Ord in Marina CA. In the interest of full disclosure, I need to reveal that I work on several military base clean up projects. I know the Fort Ord clean up as the technical advisor to the Fort Ord Environmental Justice Network (FOEJN) and serve in similar capacities at Spring Valley in Washington DC and Badger Army Ammo Depot (BAAP) in Baraboo, WI. Military base clean up efforts are little different from industrial ones, the major differences are the types of problems (industrial sites seldom include unexploded ordnance), and the agencies.
The US has military facilities across the nation, from Coast Guard stations to Army training bases, to old weapons facilities in remote areas. Some practices, long past, were thought to be safe, such as burying unused rockets and bombs in 12 foot deep pits. Other practices were not carefully thought through, such as using toxic solvents in fire department training activities that resulted in contaminating groundwater with the solvents carried into the soil by the water. And the Army may not have ever planned to turn over a firing range for civilian use, so the presence of unexploded ordnance and other debris was not a problem in a remote area of the base. But the world has changed and now we are facing these problems and others.
As we look to modernize the US infrastructure for the next millennium by “greening” our structures and processes, let’s ask that the vast military complex not be forgotten. In addition to cleaning up past problems, we need to develop materials and procedures that will not create contaminated sites and not spread toxic chemicals or damage the environment and human health. The military needs to be part of the solution in our efforts to build a sustainable world.