CAP ON STUDIES

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>]

CAP ON STUDIES
The Defense Authorization Act vetoed by President Clinton last week 
also contains a Section 323, designed to limit arbitrarily the funding 
of studies and administration to 20 percent of the Defense 
Environmental Restoration Account. The provision is not binding, but it 
represents a clear warning about what Congress expects to do next year. 
Thus, even if the bill does not become law, Section 323 requires a response.
The section reads: "It shall be the goal of the Secretary of Defense to 
limit, by the end of fiscal year 1997, spending for administration, 
support, studies, and investigation associated with the Defense 
Environmental Restoration Account to 20 percent of the total funding 
for that account." Congress requires that the Defense Department 
provide a detailed report by April 1, 1996, stating the extent to which 
the military has met the goal and how it plans to achieve it.
Congress, like almost everyone else concerned about the cleanup of 
hazardous waste sites, is frustrated that a great deal of time and 
money has been spent on cleanup, but few previously contaminated 
military properties are clean. However, I believe that an arbitrary 
limit, particularly one as low as 20 percent, will make things worse. 
For example:
* It will recreate conflict between the military and regulatory 
agencies but cutting funds to legally required investigations.
* It will cut funds for public participation and state oversight.
* It will lead the military to focus on low priority sites that do not 
require much study.
* It will force the selection of remedies without enough data on the 
extent and nature of contamination. This could lead to the spread of 
contamination. For example, without adequate study, the operation of a 
groundwater extraction system with improperly placed wells can spread 
pollution over a much wider area.
Instead of imposing an arbitrary cap, it is important instead to 
develop and promote approaches to cleanup that streamline the process 
by prioritizing oversight, cutting paperwork, eliminating studies done 
by routine only, and developing better ways to measure success. Much of 
this work is already being done, but Congress appears unaware of the 
recent progress that has be made.
Lenny Siegel