BADGER ARMY AMMO PLANT - CSWAB

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>]

THE SITUATION AT THE BADGER ARMY AMMUNITION 
PLANT

The following is the written version of a presentation made on May 
1, 1995 by Laura Olah, Executive Director of Citizens for Safe Water 
Around Badger (CSWAB) to a community meeting about the Twin 
Cities Army Ammunition Plant sponsored by Minnesota Jobs with 
Peace.

 I live near the Badger Army Ammunition Plant, which is 
located about a hour's drive northwest of Madison, Wisconsin. The 
7,000-acre facility was constructed in 1942 to produce propellant for 
cannot, rocket, and small arms ammunition. Not unlike the Twin 
Cities plant, waste products that resulted from the production include 
metals (like lead, chromium, and cadmium), solvents (carbon 
tetrachloride and trichloroethylene) and nitrocellulose, a key 
component of explosives. Production occurred during World War II, 
the Korean conflict, and the Vietnam conflict. The Badger plant 
stopped production in 1975 and has been inactive since then. Olin 
Corporation, the current operating contractor, employs 150 people 
and their are 6 Army personnel on site.

 Past disposal practices have heavily contaminated surface and 
subsurface soil on Badger property. Over the years contaminants 
migrated to the water table, creating a plume to toxic groundwater. 
On May 9, 1990 the Army reported that drinking water wells serving 
three homes south of the Badger plant had been polluted with unsafe 
levels of carbon tetrachloride and chloroform. The well of the home 
of Ken Lins, close to the plant's southern border, contained the 
highest levels of chemicals. The concentration of carbon tetrachloride 
was measured at 80 parts per billion - more than 13 times the State's 
recommended safe standard of six parts per billion. The Army 
estimates these people drank unsafe water for at least 15 years.

 The plume of contaminated groundwater continues south to 
within a quarter mile of Prairie du Sac's municipal well which serves 
the village's 3,000 residents and has reached the Wisconsin River. 
Subsequent testing revealed eight of over one hundred private wells 
in this area were contaminated with these compounds and, of these, 
four are above state groundwater standards. According to the Agency 
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, a federal health bureau, 
exposure to these chemicals is known to induce liver, kidney, and 
lung cancers.

 Community members joined together and gained quarterly 
testing for 32 private wells, organized public meetings and began 
publishing a newsletter. And this was the beginning of our 
organization - Citizens for Safe Water Around Badger, or CSWAB. 
In 1993, CSWAB successfully blocked the Army's proposal to 
increase open burning of waste propellant - a practice that disperses 
contaminated ash to the air and pollutes surrounding soils. 
Construction of a $425 million facility (SMES) - capable of 
producing dangerous levels of electromagnetic radiation - has been 
postponed. In 1994 CSWAB leveraged an unprecedented 
recommendation from the Wisconsin Division of Health expanding 
environmental testing at the Badger plant, ensuring private drinking 
wells were adequately protected.

 CSWAB's recent search through State files exposed a 
conspiracy between regulators and the Army to cover up laboratory 
errors. The State Department of Justice has initiated an investigation 
of the incident. The laboratory errors potentially compromise the 
integrity of a $6 million environmental study and the safety of nearby 
drinking water wells.

 We serve the rural communities surrounding the plant, a 
population of approximately 15,000; constituents are principally 
rural, working class people. The board consists of four women and 
one man; one professional, one retired, on farmer, one homemaker, 
and one salesperson. The drinking water wells of two board 
members have been impacted by toxins from the local Army facility; 
and we all live near the Badger plant. Our board is entirely volunteer; 
and I am the only hired staff.

 Our goal is to secure citizen participation in decisions 
regarding the Badger Army Ammunition Plant. Historically, the plant 
workers and community have been excluded from this process and as 
a result, public health and the environment have been damaged. A 
1990 study by the Wisconsin Division of Health confirmed that 
communities near the Badger plant have a significantly higher 
incidence of cancer deaths. The incidence of non-Hodgkin's 
lymphoma and kidney/ureter cancer deaths are 50% higher than the 
balance of the state. Workers and residents have been exposed to 
unsafe levels of air emissions from chemical spills and hazardous 
disposal practices. Of the 40 contaminated military sites in 
Wisconsin, the Defense Environmental Restoration agency has cited 
Badger as the most polluted.

 Unfortunately, my community's experience with military 
toxics is not unique. If you live near the Twin Cities Army 
Ammunition Plant, you know first hand about the impacts military 
pollution has on human health and the environment. Out of 32 
contaminated military facilities in Minnesota, Twin Cities has the 
second highest number of sources of pollution. (Fort Snelling is 
ranked first.)

 For too many years, the military has been able to use 
"national security" as an excuse for lying to the public. They simply 
have not been held accountable, and we are the ones that have paid 
the price. Clearly, public awareness and involvement are critical to 
assure that communities know the extent of local pollution, facilities 
are adequately cleaned up, disposal methods are safe, and new 
military or civilian industry is pollution-prevention oriented to protect 
the environment and human health.

 It was for these reasons that in late 1993, CSWAB petitioned 
the Department of Defense for the establishment of a citizens 
advisory board; of the nation's nearly 1,855 contaminated military 
sites, Badger was one of the five pilot sites. There were 15 sites in all 
designated by the Army, Navy, and Air Force. The intent of the 
Restoration Advisory Boards, or RABs as they're called, was to give 
those people who are directly affected by cleanup activities, the 
stakeholders, a greater role in the cleanup decision-making process. 
Examples of stakeholders include nearby residents, local citizens, 
environmental and public interest groups, workers, and Native 
American and indigenous peoples.

 The Keystone report, the guidance document for this process, 
recommends "special efforts should be made to provide notice and 
opportunity to participate for people who are or have historically been 
disproportionately impacted by site contamination." Moreover, the 
Keystone report recommended that the EPA, through an open and 
democratic process, lead the RAB membership selection process.

 Although leadership within the Department of Defense had 
agreed to the principles of the Keystone report, the local 
Commander's representative ignored this directive and hand-picked 
the membership. I was told, first-hand, by one of the members, "I 
told Dave (the Commander's rep) that as much as I liked playing 
racquetball with him, I really didn't want to be on this board." So 
now you have some idea who was on the board.

 Now let me tell you who wasn't on the board. The people 
with bad wells. Note one of the families that had wells contaminated 
by pollution from the plan was invited to serve on the committee. I'll 
remind you of the intent of the RAB, which was to involve people 
"disproportionately impacted by site contamination."

 So, my first recommendation to your community is that you 
insist the local command honor the recommendations of the Keystone 
report. The success of your local group will depend a great deal on 
its foundation, which is a membership selection process that is open 
and democratic, and a membership that is diverse and representative 
of all stakeholders.

 Second, the Army will probably insist that your RAB have 
both a community co-chair and an Army co-chair. I think you can 
make that work to your advantage. If the Army is a participant in the 
decision-making process, then I believe the recommendations that 
come of our your committee will have a greater chance of being 
implemented.

 Third, I would work very hard to get funding for technical 
assistance monies. Like it or not, the RAB members will be called on 
to make recommendations on highly technical issues. Even if I was a 
hydrogeologist, I don't have expertise in air toxics, RCRA law, 
epidemiology... well you get the idea.

 Our RAB, however, despite its rocky start, has effectively 
influenced some specific proposals. For instance, a proposal for soil 
incineration for cleanup of explosives contaminated soils has been 
blocked. The Army is now in the process of conducting treatability 
studies for alternative, safer technologies.

 In closing, I can't emphasize enough how important it is for 
you to participate in the public decision-making process.

 For generations, we have trusted the military and the 
regulators to protect our environment and our families. And look 
where we are.

 You have a right to know, you have a right to participate, and 
you have a right to have a clean, safe environment for yourselves and 
your children.