From: | Aimee Houghton <aimeeh@cpeo.org> |
Date: | Tue, 15 Aug 2000 15:16:29 -0700 (PDT) |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | [CPEO-MEF] Range Rule Promulgation Come & Gone |
The final Range Rule promulgation deadline of August 6, 2000 has come and gone and still the Range Rule sits at OMB. This comes as really no suprise to people who have been involved in this process. DOD, EPA and other federal agencies are still in negotiation over areas of disagreement within the Rule. As the rule-making process only allows for federal agency review at this stage, it is anyone's guess as to the nature of the disputes. However, based upon historic differences regarding the scope of the Range Rule and things we have discerned, it can probably be safely concluded that they consist of: 1. Dispute Resolution. The Range Rule defers ultimate dispute resolution to the Department of Defense. In other words, the polluter is the final arbitrator. While top-level resolutions may be few, it is fairly certain this will influence decisions at all levels. 2. CERCLA or CERCLA-like. It appears that DOD wants to pick and choose which CERCLA provisions and the NCP provisions for which it should be held accountable. In other words they want to cobble together a regulatory scheme of their own devising. Other stakeholders in this process have argued that private polluters don't have that option and neither should DOD. 3. I have heard the the Range Rule now contains something titled: Emergency Accelerated Response. Apparently this allows DOD to determine unilaterally when there is an emergency, what responses are appropriate to mitigate or dispose of the threat under an explosives safety arguement. THis appears to be similar in procedure to a time crtical removal action, thereby avoiding most of the NCP standards and stakeholder input and involvement. What will happen now? It is highly doubtful that this rule will be promulgated before the end of this administration. This should come as no great suprise as it seems that is what DOD has been working towards for the last two years. I have heard that the new "drop-dead" date or week (as the case may be) is right after Labor Day. This seems highly unlikely as the areas of disagreement are so large. At the moment it appears that the Range Rule partnering process (and I should mention here that the states, who have been part of this process up until DOD provided EPA with the revised rule last December, have not been active sincen then in light of the federal rule making process) seems only to be working for DOD. They are benefiting from what appears to be an illusion of partnership. Though OMB cannot actually provide citizens with any information about the Range Rule, you can meet with them or write to them expressing your concerns. For the moment this is the only avenue we have at our disposal. Aimee ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Aimee R. Houghton CPEO, Associate Director 122 C Street NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20001-2109 tel: 202-662-18888; fax: 202-628-1825 Email: aimeeh@cpeo.org http://www.cpeo.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 ___________________________________________________________ T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics | |
Prev by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Comunicado ALERTA ROJA bomba nuclear en Vieques? Next by Date: [CPEO-MEF] NIF-"Watchdog" calls for criminal investigation | |
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] Comunicado ALERTA ROJA bomba nuclear en Vieques? Next by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] NIF-"Watchdog" calls for criminal investigation |