Federal Facilities Environmental Journal最新文献

The Michigan Department of Military Affairs (MDMA) recently completed an environmental investigation of the 27,000-acre Range 40 artillery and air-to-ground complex located at the Camp Grayling Army National Guard Training Site. The study, commenced in 1992 as part of a consent order agreement between the MDMA and state regulators, is an extensive five-phase investigation designed to measure effects to the environment as a result of over 50 years of military training at this state owned and operated installation. Conducted under a $2.2 million contract awarded to QST Environmental, Inc. (formerly Environmental Science & Engineering, Inc.), this investigation-commonly referred to as the “Range 40 Study”-focused on groundwater, surface waters, wetlands, soils, sediments, and fish in and around the 7,000-acre “impact” area situated in the central northern region of Michigan's lower peninsula.

Findings indicate that surface waters (lakes and streams), lake and stream sediments, groundwater, fisheries, and air quality have not been adversely impacted by explosive-related chemicals. Findings do indicate the presence of low levels of metals in soils, lake and stream sediments, and groundwater. During the workplan process and subsequent investigations, results were obtained and lessons learned that could have implications on national defense readiness and environmental sustainability. This article will present these results and lessons learned, including:

While the concept of environmentally preferable purchasing by federal agencies is not a new initiative by any means, it has been pursued with never-before-seen vigor under the Clinton Administration. The concept goes back in law to at least the 1976 amendments to the Solid Waste Disposal Act, more commonly known as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Section 6002 of that statute created a dual approach by which EPA designated items with recycled content and buying federal agencies had an obligation to buy the designated goods. These are sometimes called “guideline goods.” For almost 20 years, however, only a handful of products (cement containing fly ash, re-refined oil, retread tires, paper and building insulation materials) were designated, and even then, the federal agencies were essentially left to their own devices as to when purchase of guideline items would be in their interest.

Certain classes of chemicals foreign to the human body can interfere with endocrine hormonal systems. Hormones are the master controllers of biochemical processes. A wide range of pathological conditions can ensue at all stages of life. Research has shown these or similar chemicals to be increasing in natural and man-made environments. Some research indicates that wildlife is exhibiting the destructive effects of hormone disruption caused by man-made chemicals. The claim is made that human health is already being adversely affected. Many information gaps exist. Major research and screening programs are under way around the world that could well lead to banning or curtailed use for many heavily used chemicals. Makers and users of chemicals can avoid the embarrassing surprises experienced with previous new environmental issues and control programs by joining in the ongoing issue-framing scientific, legislative, and regulatory processes.

Industry and government executives have debated for some time the topic of outsourcing and privatization in the defense industry. Many believe that it is imperative that the obstacles to the Department of Defense's aggressive use of outsourcing and privatization be identified and that solutions be proposed to remove such obstacles. This article was written with the intent to assist organizations in identifying, minimizing, and allocating the potentially massive environmental liability that confronts contractors in any on-site outsourcing and privatization services (i.e., depot support, coproduction and GOCOs, logistics, maintenance, remedial action contracting, and even generic “ash & trash” services). In addition, this article examines potential sources for recovery of environmental costs that contractors incur in consolidating their own facilities during discretionary downsizing or post-merger restructuring.

Perhaps no area of environmental law is less understood than the law that regulates radioactive materials and wastes. Radiation experts such as health physicists who talk in terms of “curies,” “Sierverts,” and “critical mass” have a language and methodology that seem alien to most environmental practitioners used to dealing with the intricacies of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Clean Air Act, or the Clean Water Act. When I think of how most environmental engineers and attorneys view the rules that regulate radioactive materials, I am reminded of a Churchill quote that Russia was “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.”

Many people assume that virtually all rules pertaining to radioactive materials and waste are governed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations. While the NRC obviously is a major “player,” it is not the only one. Depending on the quantity and type of substance involved, the activity involved, that is, possession, use, transportation, disposal, or cleanup of contamination, other agencies may be “players” as well. Those agencies include the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Energy (DOE), the Department of Transportation (DOT), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), other federal agencies such as the Department of Defense (DOD), and even state radiation protection agencies.

In spite of an extraordinary administrative burden, most environmental support services at military and other federal installations tend to be split among various contractors along functional lines. This portioning of services introduces many inefficiencies and fails to take advantage of potential economies of scale. Inefficiencies can be worsened dramatically when funding uncertainties are introduced. Consolidation of all environmental services at a federal facility, including environmental operations and maintenance, under a single contract facilitates a phenomenon of organizational integration. With management attention, integration can be nurtured and maximized, substantially reducing program costs while dramatically improving quality and responsiveness.

The natural world is replete with examples from which we may learn to be better managers. Uncertainties in program funding create essentially the same challenges to business managers as uncertainties in the supply of food and nutrients present to natural populations. By viewing temporal trends in programfunding in the same way that nature views trends in resource supply we may better understand how the introduction of funding uncertainties impacts the evolution of the optimal team size and skill mix. And we may also evaluate how a fully integrated environmental program can work to offset the deleterious effects of unpredictable program funding.