| From: | CPEO Moderator <cpeo@cpeo.org> |
| Date: | 3 May 2002 18:16:49 -0000 |
| Reply: | cpeo-military |
| Subject: | [CPEO-MEF] Congressional Letter of Appeal |
[POSTED BY SARAH SHAPLEY (springvalleydc@starpower.net)]
Hello Neighbors,
Here is the letter of appeal to congress from the residential members of
the SV Restoration Advisory Board. This campaign message is in two
parts, this with the letter itself and next with the list congressional
contacts. I encourage each and everyone of you to
circulate this campaign message to your friends and acquaintance and to
use the letter to add your voice to the campaign. Add your own cover
note! I also encourage you and them to contact us at this e-mail
address to inform us of your individual communications. It would help
us keep track. Please encourage others to contact us at this e-mail
address to extend our network of neighborhood coverage by e-mail. I
will keep you informed of political response and progress.
- SSShapley
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE: April 2002
TO:
Dear
I write as the elected Community Co-chair of the Spring Valley
Restoration Advisory Board on behalf of its fourteen residential members
to urge you to increase and earmark the FY03 appropriation for the
clean-up of this Formerly Used Defense Site (FUDS) by the Army Corps of
Engineers and also to mandate a similar level-of-effort funding for the
next three years so as to enable the clean-up to be completed in FY06.
The site, which the U.S. Army leased from the American University in
World War I, was known as the American University Experimental Station
(AUES) and was used to develop and test chemical warfare material and
ordnance. It has the dubious distinction of being a ìdouble dangerî
FUDS, as it has both chemical and ordnance contamination.
The four-year period is the best feasible time-limit achievable on
engineering and logistical grounds in this residential community of
almost 1200 homes in our nationís capital. The residents have been
counting the calendar of adverse impact for ten years just to get to
this point. (See ìBackgroundî page below.) A congressional earmark of
a four-year mandatory level-of-effort funding would ensure completion
after a decade of dereliction, delay and uncertainty.
Our requested mandate for an earmarked level-of-effort funding
sufficient to completion in four years is based on the most recent Army
estimate of costs. The total cost-to-complete is $53,765M. Thus, the
mandated level-of-effort required for FY03 - FY06 is $13,441.25M
annually. Details of this estimate, important for accountability, are
given below.
The total cost-to-complete is $53,765M, of which $36,460M is for
unit-costed remediation and restoration (R&R) plus unit-costed munitions
detection and restoration, and $17,305M is for associated, regular
in-house support. The ratio of these components is, thus, 68% to 32%.
Pro-rated for four years, the annual level needed is $13,441.25M. The
Arsenic soil R&R estimate ($19,460M) is derived as follows. A property
with Arsenic levels above 20ppm in the soil as has been determined by
the follow-up grid sampling will be remediated. Each grid, a 20x20ft.
square, will cost $20K for both remediation and restoration. The 161
properties with such levels comprise 973 grids, making for a total R&R
cost of $19,460M. The munitions estimate ($17,000M) is based on a
multi-point review and prioritization scheme and allows for coverage of
200 properties (geophysical survey, intrusive investigation of
anomalies, and restoration).
We believe the Spring Valley FUDS merits your special attention and a
mandated level-of-effort funding for several reasons -- besides that of
the excessively prolonged time-line. Spring Valley is the first FUDS to
have all these special characteristics which means that this project is
a test and model for the governmentís ability to address any other
comparable site in future. First, it is a closely settled residential
neighborhood with extensive and mature landscaping in a major American
city. Second, it is large site for an urban environment and one which
has been drastically topographically changed in its establishment as a
residential neighborhood. Third, it is a site with both chemical
contamination of an environmental medium (soil) and also chemical
warfare munitions and ordnance explosives contamination. Fourth, it is
a site organized for survey and remediation by homeowner property, with
all properties, each and every one, subjected to testing, another first
in the FUDS program. Fifth, the field testing for ordnance will use the
most recently developed methods of geophysical detection and
containment-cum-removal, another test and model for the government.
Sixth, it is ranked Level One in terms of DODís Relative Risk Evaluation
scheme. In sum, we believe the government will benefit on both
technical and managerial grounds if it meets this challenge in a
positive, citizen-friendly way.
Finally, we call your attention the national context of need for
serious budgetary support for Defense-related environmental
restoration. We have undertaken to communicate with many other FUDSí
boards across the nation in this cause, which is shared by constituents
in every state. (See ìNational Contextî page below.) And, in closing,
we would like to emphasize the productive working relationship that has
been struck between the three government partners (the Corps with DCís
Department of Health and US EPAís Region III) and also between the
Restoration Advisory Board and the government partners. We maintain
close liaison, too, with the Mayorís Science Advisory Panel. We are
pleased to have had the opportunity to participate in DODís Senior
Executive Review Group. And above all, we are pleased that our own
Delegate Norton has been successful in urging the Army to re-program
some FY02 funds to cover unanticipated costs in the clean-up of a major
munitions burial pit. This means the project is not entering FY03 in a
deficit position with respect to its plans for investigation and
remediation. It means that, with Congressional help, FY03 - FY06 could
see the end of this decade-old clean-up and the restoration of Spring
Valley to its deserved environmental health in our nationís capital.
We thank you for your consideration and look forward to meeting with
you or your staff about our request for additional funding to accomplish
the Spring Valley clean-up in the next four years. Please do not
hesitate to contact me with any questions you may have in consideration
of this request.
/Sig/
Sarah Stowell Shapley
Community Co-chair, Spring Valley Restoration Advisory Board
4710 Upton Street, NW
Washington, DC 20016-2370
Tel: 202-237-7530
E-Mail: <SpringValleyDC@starpower.net
BACKGROUND:
The Spring Valley Restoration Advisory Board is the mechanism
authorized for local feedback as a sounding-board of community
stakeholders for the Defense Departmentís ìFormerly Used Defense Sitesî
under their Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP). The
Department of Defense has designated the Department of the Army as the
executive agent for the FUDS program, and the Army Corps of Engineers is
the program executor. Spring Valley (project code #C03DC0918) falls
within the Baltimore District of the North Atlantic Division of the
Corps.
Spring Valley requires clean-up in two categories of DOD program
elements: HTRW (Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste) and MEC
(Munitions and Explosives of Concern). Under an earlier attempt in
1993-1995 (project code #C03DC091801) the Army addressed some
contamination and then declared a ìNo Further Actionî decision. This
was demonstrated as wrong by local efforts, the decision effectively
reversed, and a second, limited round of testing and remediation
undertaken in 1998 - 1999. A third round (project codes
#C03DC091802-03), comprising 61 properties nearby, was started in
January 2000. In February 2001, mindful of public demand, the Army
initiated the present project (project codes #C03DC091804-05)
encompassing the full 591 acres outside American University and all of
the approximately 1200 residential properties.
The Army operates the project in conjunction with two governmental
ìpartnersî, the DC Department of Health and the US Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III.
The current status is: Arsenic soil testing has been completed on the
residential properties; 12% warranted follow-up testing due to their
having some above natural background levels; of these, 161 properties
require remediation and restoration; 7 properties, due to exceptionally
elevated Arsenic levels, are slated for FY02 Time Critical Removal
Action (TCRA) of contaminated soil; and the two-instrument, advanced
geophysical field testing for chemical warfare munitions and munitions
debris is to begin this summer. Remediation will be undertaken on an
integrated basis, combining Arsenic and munitions data for each
property.
NATIONAL CONTEXT:
While our basic request is for additional earmarked funds for Spring
Valley, we are concerned that the Congress and the Department of Defense
acknowledge the greater need for funding in the whole area of
military-related environmental restoration than is evident in the DODís
current request in the Presidentís Budget for FY03 and recent yearsí DOD
requests and congressional appropriations. We refer you to the GAO
report of 2001, ìClean-up at Formerly Used Defense Sitesî (GAO-01-557).
There are two unhappy aspects to the national picture: many No Further
Action decisions hav e been reversed by dint of state or local actions;
and it is difficult to count the actual length of time it has taken or
is taking to accomplish actual clean-up for whole sites. It may be that
Spring Valley is not so unusual in these respects.
It is also difficult to aggregate sites by Relative Risk Evaluation in
order to gauge proportions of priority on a national basis. DOD in its
FY03 Presidentís Budget for ìEnvironmental Programsî (p.118 ff.) gives
the current number of ìhighî risk FUDS as 373, of which 126 have been
ìremovedî as of February 2002. It claims to have added funds ($20M)
over previous years in its current budget projections, although it is
difficult to see if this represents a true net increase given the other
programmatic reductions itemized. It is also unclear if the increase is
due to pricing increases or activity increases. We understand that the
Corps of Engineers has estimated it has some $700M worth of projects on
its current national agenda and an effective ceiling on its budget of
$200M. The scope of the national need is estimated by the Pentagon as
2,800 properties requiring clean-up with a cost-to-complete of $12B, of
which two-thirds is for munitions and one-third for chemical
contamination. These numbers and problems of prioritization only
reinforce our sense of urgency that Spring Valleyís double-danger FUDS
get done so the lessons learned can be applied elsewhere.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| |
|
Prev by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Leukemia cluster sparks lawsuit Next by Date: RE: [CPEO-MEF] sprawl | |
|
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] Leukemia cluster sparks lawsuit Next by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] Lines in the sand | |