Letter to hill for signatures

[Polly Parks <pparks@igc.apc.org>]

Following is a letter to the U.S. Congress concerning Section 329 of the
FY2000 Defense Authorization bill.  The section deals with information
release to foreign nations relative to closed U.S. bases.  If you can be a
signatory, please email me back along with organizational affiliation, if
any.  While membership is still in formation, the Host Nations
Environmental Coalition held its first meeting July 14, 1999 at the Army
Navy Club in Washington, D.C.  Representatives from the embassies of ten
nations which have hosted or host U.S. personnel and facilities were in
attendance.  This letter is the first collaborative action to emerge from
the group.

It is imperative this letter reach the U.S. Congress before the August
recess.  If you need additional information about the goals of the HNEC,
the text of the DoD appeal, or the proposed and final text of the
Wellstone Amendment (Section 329), please let me know, as well as whether
you can handle word6 files.

Thanks so much.

Polly Parks, Ex. Dir.
Host Nations Environmental Coalition 
1220 19th St., N.W. Suite 400; Washington, D.C. 20036
phone:  202-879-4288; Fax:  202-783-0444; email:  pparks@igc.apc.org

To:   Hill Committees
Fr:	Host Nations, US industry, US state organizations, NGOs

Re:	In Support of Amendment No. 381 to the FY 2000 Senate Defense
Authorization Bill

The Host Nations Environmental Coalition and other signatories of this
letter, are writing to urge you to support and maintain Amendment No. 381
(Section 329), introduced by Senator Paul Wellstone and adopted, by the
full Senate on May 25, 1999.   We are urging your retention of Section 329,
because it is an essential step towards equity between the United States
and its allies in how environmental restoration matters are handled.  In
particular, Section 329 addresses the first step in establishing a standard
methodology by which the U.S. military safeguards the environment and
public health and safety.  Such information is necessary to ensure
reasonable reuse of former U.S. military facilities in nations that have
hosted such facilities.

The amendment requires the Secretary of Defense to publicly disclose
available, existing information relevant to a foreign nation's
determination of environmental contamination at any former U.S. military
facility in a foreign country.  Additionally, the Secretary is required to
provide Congress with a list of the information disclosed.  The amendment
excludes information that could adversely affect U.S. national security.
It may not be construed to establish U.S. liability or obligation for the
costs of any environmental clean up that may ensue.  

Similar to state and territorial governments in the U.S., nations that have
hosted U.S. military facilities must know what has been left behind in
order to protect public health and safety and develop reasonable
restoration and reuse plans.  Currently, no procedure exists for the
transfer of this basic information.  Practice by the Department of Defense
has been erratic at best and rarely has met the minimum thresholds that
constitute good business practices by U.S. environmental companies.  In
addition, those U.S. companies involved in the environmental cleanup of
former overseas military facilities have been greatly hindered by the
absence of the information when proceeding with restoration activities at
former U.S. facilities in other nations.  The net effect is that cleanup is
slower and more costly, and a bitter foreign relations aftertaste can
linger, sometimes affecting on-going and future defense relationships.  The
amendment seeks to remedy this situation by removing one obstacle.

However, it is our understanding that on July 12, 1999, the Department of
Defense sent the U.S. Congress An Appeal of Section 329 that states that
DoD would not oppose the provision if it were amended to:

(1) Require disclosure only upon the request of a host nation, and
establish a reasonable time period during which such requests must be
received.

2) Require disclosure be made to the host nation -- not its public generally.

(3)  Not require the Department to duplicate disclosures it has already
made to host nations.

(4) Provide an alternative procedure to permit the department to report to
Congress if the Department believes disclosure is ill-advised.

We would prefer to see Section 329 strengthened to the original language
proposed by Senator Wellstone.  The modified amendment represents the
minimum acceptable position that the signatories of this letter can
endorse.  It would be ill advised for Congress to accept the Department of
Defense appeal since it contains no recommendations on how to strengthen
the language to be more congruent with their management practices inside
the United States.  
This lack of consistency over what is essentially a matter of method and
technology has been frustrating for all the parties involved -- from the
Host Nations to State Department desk officers, from local conversion
authorities and municipalities to the installation commanders and their
staff, and from the military environmental programs to the U.S.
environmental industry.

In addition, we wish to register our concerns over the Department of
Defense Appeal proposed modifications.

· Proposed modification (1) fails to provide specifics as to the process by
which DoD proposes to handle requests or their sense of what a reasonable
time frame is or why it is needed.  In addition, the proposed modification
does not address recourse in those instances where the Department of
Defense fails to respond to requests in a timely fashion or there is
dispute over whether the intent of Section 329 has been met.
 
· In regards to proposed modification (2), while we were comfortable with
the original language that Senator Wellstone proposed ("The Secretary of
Defense shall provide to each foreign nation…."), the Senate Armed Services
Committee changed the language to public disclosure.  Although we are
comfortable with that original language, we are also comfortable with the
language that was passed by the Senate as we recognize that the information
is of interest to other U.S. government agencies, environmental companies,
and the U.S. public, as well as the government and public of Host Nations.   

· Concerning proposed modification (3), the United States has been closing
facilities in other nations for more than 40 years.  During that time there
has been no consistent standard or methodology applied in turnover of
facilities or information related to environmental issues, not even the
minimal threshold that is being proposed in Section 329.  This is similar
to the situation in the United States prior to the passage of the Federal
Facilities Compliance Act where the Department of Defense had been
inconsistently characterizing formerly used defense sites (FUDS).  Many
FUDS were initially listed as "no further action" after cursory examination
of primary information.  That information is now being comprehensively
revisited to produce more accurate environmental baseline surveys and
preliminary remedial investigations.   As there has been no process in
place, we believe it is in the best interests of all parties to develop a
collaborative process to make Section 329 work rather than to erect
needless barriers.

· In regards to proposed modification (4), we are confident, from the
transparency and effectiveness by which the military environmental cleanup
has been undertaken in the U.S. and the territories of Guam, Puerto Rico,
the Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa, that no
contamination which would affect U.S. national security interests is
involved.  In any case, Section 329 as it stands contains subsection
"(2)(c) National Security. --Information the Secretary of Defense believes
could adversely affect U.S. National Security shall not be released
pursuant to this provision." We recommend changing the responsible official
from the Secretary of Defense to the President of the United States with
notification to Congress.  That wording will ensure the Department of
Defense is not put in charge of oversight of its own practices.

We thank you very much for this opportunity to register our awareness and
concerns regarding this important legislation.

Sincerely,