From: | rama@accutek.com |
Date: | Tue, 15 Feb 2000 15:46:36 -0800 (PST) |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | [CPEO-MEF] California Failing to do Its Job at Depot written by Grace Po |
This "Your Turn" Editorial ran on today's Reno Gazeette Journal, 2/15/99 Thank you for posting. California Failing to do Its Job at Depot Why is the California Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC) undermining local and tribal efforts to halt Open Burning/ Open Detonations (OB/OD) of obsolete munitions at the Sierra Army Depot? Why has DTSC failed to staunchly advocate the use of available alternative technologies? This in spite of California's hazardous waste regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 22 C.C.R. Section 66265.382) which allows the open burning/open detonating of "waste explosives," but only if the waste explosives "cannot safely be disposed of through other modes of treatment." The OB/OD conducted at the Sierra Army Depot violates these regulations because other modes of treatment do exist for safely disposing munitions. DTSC's response that alternatives technologies are not available at the Depot suggests that alternatives are nonexistent. As our recent tour of the Hawthorne Western Area Demilitarization Facility demonstrates many types of munitions can be safely recycled or disposed of. In addition, at least one manufacturer has designed a "blast chamber" that is capable of containing explosions of munitions with 1,000 pounds of net explosive weight. Such chambers are capable of containing the explosions of most, if not all, of the munitions disposed by the Army at the Sierra Army Depot. Furthermore, development of several alternative technologies at the Depot would assure no loss of jobs at the Depot and would instead provide an opportunity for increased employment at both the Hawthorne and Sierra Army Depots. California Department of Toxic Substances has taken no consequential actions to cease OB/OD activities and advocate new alternatives at the Sierra Army Depot while at the same time promoting the Army's request for a ten year permit. The Draft Environmental Impact Report prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act provides no serious analysis of current alternatives available to the Army. Instead, DTSC has allowed the fox to watch over the chicken coop by relying solely on the Army to describe the process for evaluation of alternatives to OB/OD and incineration. DTSC inadequately attempts to address the call for alternatives technologies by requiring that the Army submit a certification for the evaluation of alternative treatment technologies every year after they grant the 10 year permit. We also question why DTSC halted the burning of Minuteman solid rocket fuel motors at United Technologies Corporation (UTC), located near San Jose, due to health and environmental concerns of impacted local residents but, has since allowed this same activity at the Sierra Army Depot. DTSC has most recently joined federal regulators in recommending that the Army explore alternatives to the Open Detonation of unexploded ordnance at Fort Ord, CA. Are residents living near UTC and Fort Ord considered more valuable in the eyes of DTSC because of population densities or is it because DTSC knows that the prevailing winds blow a great share of the toxic plumes into Nevada and therefore it is not their worry? In response to Lassen County concerns in a letter dated December, 17, 1999, DTSC has downplayed the legitimate concerns of Lassen County with responses based on assumptions and theoretical findings undermining efforts to see the issue resolved. The cave man days of OB/OD are coming to an end. It is time DTSC take firm and responsible actions to come on board and demand an end to OB/OD and the establishment of alternative technologies at the Sierra Army Depot. Written by: Grace Marie Potorti Director Rural Alliance for Military Accountability (RAMA) P.O. Box 60036 Reno, NV 89506 Phone: 775-677-7001 Fax: 775-677-7001* E-mail: rama@accutek.com Website: http://www.rama-usa.org You can find archived listserve messages on the CPEO website at http://www.cpeo.org/lists/index.html. If this email has been forwarded to you and you'd like to subscribe, please send a message to: cpeo-military-subscribe@igc.topica.com _____________________________________________________________ Who will win the Oscars? Spout off on our Entertainment list! http://www.topica.com/lists/showbiztalk | |
Prev by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Who Decides What? Next by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Sign-On letter to President Clinton re Vieques directive | |
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] Who Decides What? Next by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] Sign-On letter to President Clinton re Vieques directive |