From: | Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org> |
Date: | Wed, 25 Jun 1997 14:30:08 -0700 (PDT) |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | Re: SENATE CLEANUP NUMBERS |
Lenny, When you say the administration's request, I assume that is the President's budget, which is based on the requests from the Secretary of Defense, as a result of OSD's review of the environmental restoration requests from the different branches. I ask because in addressing the CERCLA sites and the current prohibited use of environmental restoration funds to address UXO (high explosive never,and chemical-filled only when specific permission is handed down from high above), I have learned that the Army's request for environmental fund ing is not based on actual need, but more so on higher policy (DOD I believe, likely Office of Secretary of Defense) to address 50% of the high priority sites by 2002. This is significant because there are sites that will not have funding simply based on Pentagon policy not on science or clear budget constraints. It is a DOD choice to leave 50% unaddressed until well into the next decade, and this does not even consider the medium and low priority sites. I do not know how it is at other installations, but by APG's own admission, APG will not be able to meet the 50% goal (which the tax-payers had no say in) by 2002, based on the current level of funding (APG-Installation restoration 27 million down from a high of 94 million in 1994). The final results seem to be this: The Army requests less money than they actually need to DOD based on DOD's goal, and then these requests are submitted to the President and Congress which get cut more, because Congress is cutting everything and believes the DOD should share the burden of debt reduction (which is fine but does Congress know that DOD is requesting less than what they need?) And of course this is further complicated by the fact that the Department of the Army has a budget of over 60 billion and only applies 2/3 of 1% to restoration efforts. I am not sure Congress should be contributing to DOD's effort to keep the environmental restoration part of DOA's money small and inadequate. Just a thought for the day. Ted Henry <thenry@umabnet.ab.umd.edu> | |
References
| |
Prev by Date: LAND USE & REMEDY SECTION - RFF Next by Date: Re: SENATE CLEANUP NUMBERS | |
Prev by Thread: SENATE CLEANUP NUMBERS Next by Thread: Re: SENATE CLEANUP NUMBERS |