From: | Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org> |
Date: | Mon, 11 Mar 1996 09:23:32 -0800 (PST) |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | FFERDC REPORT FINALIZED |
FFERDC FINALIZES REPORT The Federal Facilities Environmental Restoration Dialogue Committee (FFERDC) has reached consensus on its final report. If the implementation of its February, 1993 Interim Report is any indication, the new report should help shape the nation's approach to cleaning up hazardous waste contamination for years to come. FFERDC is an official advisory group of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, facilitated by the Colorado-based Keystone Center. The fifty members of the FFERDC represents other Federal agencies, including the Departments of Energy, Defense, Interior, Agriculture, and Commerce (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration); state hazardous waste officials and attorneys general; Indian nations; labor unions; and representatives of communities where contaminated federal facilities are located. Since the issuance of the Interim Report, the group has been expanded to include representatives of the armed services - in addition to the Defense Environmental Security office - local government, and environmental justice organizations. Members of the Committee have pre-print versions of the Final Report. By mid-April, it will be possible to request copies directly from U.S. EPA (202/260-1606; fax: 202/260-5646) or the Keystone Center (970/468-5822; fax: 970/262-0152; e-mail: tkcsppp@keystone.org). The Committee plans to hold briefings for Senate and House staff on April 15, followed by a press conference on April 16. You may wish to let your elected officials, as well as reporters who cover cleanup in your community, know that these events are coming up. The Final Report contains an introduction (Chapter 1) and five substantive chapters. Chapter 2 repeats and explains in depth the "Principles for Environmental Cleanup of Federal Facilities," released by FFERDC in August, 1995. Chapter 3 and Chapter 4 expand upon "Community Involvement" and "Advisory Boards," those areas where the Interim Report had its most visible impact. The new report addresses ways that communities of color and local government representatives can be better integrated into the cleanup process. Chapter 6, "Capacity Building," addresses the importance of providing resources to ensure that the various stakeholders, official as well as public, are in a position to implement the other recommendations. In that last chapter, the Committee urges that EPA develop a public stakeholders' guide to Federal facilities cleanup, both to introduce the cleanup process and to explain the findings and recommendations of the Committee. Chapter 5, "Funding and Priority Setting," was the most difficult chapter for the Committee to reach consensus on, but its implementation may be the most far-reaching. The section (Chapter 4) of the Interim Report that addressed the issues of budget-building and managing budget shortfalls was subject to widely varying interpretations, and FFERDC members themselves disagree about the degree to which it was implemented. The new Chapter, hammered out in marathon negotiating sessions between regulatory agencies (U.S. EPA and the states) and regulated agencies (polluters such as Defense and Energy), builds upon the increased cooperation (among regulated agencies, regulators, and public stakeholders) that is already growing out of the Committee's work. The chapter offers guidelines, building on its August, 1995 Principles (Chapter 2), for using risk and other factors to set priorities on the way up - that is, while budgets are being built. It also suggests ways to integrate the establishment or implementation of regulatory milestones (in negotiated cleanup agreements) with the establishment of Federal budget levels. It redefines the "flexible fair share" method of distributing budget shortfalls. The FFERDC approach will not eliminate every potential conflict. However, the Committee concludes, in the face of anticipated conflicts between regulatory milestones and budget shortfalls: "the Committee expects regulating agencies will consider in good faith the adjustment of milestones and other requirements and regulated agencies will explore the availability of additional funds within their agency budgets." This report is not likely merely to collect dust. The Interim Report was widely read and broadly implemented. Many of the participants in the institutional structure established by that report - particularly the members of the site-specific advisory boards formed by federal agencies - have been waiting for the new report. Agencies are already implementing pieces of it. Perhaps the greatest unknown is Congress. Frustrated by the high cost and slow pace of federal facilities cleanup, Congress has not only been slashing overall cleanup budgets, but it has targeted pieces of the program that the FFERDC considers vital to success. Will the Republican majority endorse the hard-fought consensus of cleanup stakeholders? Or will it follow a course of its own? The FFERDC concludes its report optimistically: "Building on the recommendations from the Committee's 1993 Interim Report," this report recommends that federal agencies undertake more expansive and meaningful community involvement in general, and make more effective use of advisory boards. It also recommends that agencies use a combination of approaches to priority setting and the allocation of funding shortfalls. Finally, because federal facilities cleanup issues are so complex, federal agencies, state, tribal, and local governments, communities and other stakeholders must forge partnerships that will enable our nation to make the best decisions possible to address environmental contamination at federal facilities. Through the collaborative processes recommended in this report, the Committee hopes that the federal government and its stakeholders will rise to the challenge posed by federal facilities cleanups by establishing a model for responsible democratic decision-making resulting in reasonable and credible cleanup programs." Lenny Siegel | |
Prev by Date: COMMENTS ON DOD RANGE RULE Next by Date: Letter From RMA RAB & SSAB | |
Prev by Thread: COMMENTS ON DOD RANGE RULE Next by Thread: Letter From RMA RAB & SSAB |