Re: News from Washington.

[CGumbi@aol.com]

Lenney,

As usual your observation of the situation is accurate and laced with good
insight. i.e. your statement, 
 >"It's ironic that Congress is all for giving more power to the states in

 >social areas - medical, welfare - but is concerned about state authority
and
 >regulatory capacity when it comes to enforcing environmental laws at
Federal facilities."

The question(s) I would like answered are: who are the authors of these
bills and how can we get to them? 
How do we effect the individuals who are supporting this shortsighted, myopic
process in managing Federal cleanups?

Curt Gandy
Fort Ord RAB

>Subject: Re: News from Washington.
>Date: 95-07-07 17:14:27 EDT
>From: lsiegel@igc.org (Pacific Studies Center)
>Reply-to: careerpro@igc.org (Conference cpro.military)
>To: careerpro@igc.org (Recipients of conference)

>The DSMOA figure that Gawain mentioned is funding to state regulators
>through the Defense State Memorandum of Agreement. Historically, the
>Defense Department has transferred about 1% of its cleanup expenses for
>DERA bases in a state to the state regulators. and 1.5% for BRAC (closing
bases).
>A cut of 75% in this program would seriously compromise state agencies
ability
>to oversee Federal cleanup, and for most bases - non-Superfund, non-closing
>bases - state oversight is all that there is.

>It's ironic that Congress is all for giving more power to the states in
>social areas - medical, welfare - but is concerned about state authority and
>regulatory capacity when it comes to enforcing environmental laws at
>Federal facilities.
>LS