Pentagon Seeks Exemptions From Enviromental Laws

by Danielle Knight

But proponents of the federal legislation argue that environmental laws are thwarting the military's ability to adequately train soldiers and test weapons.

Under the draft bill, bombing ranges, air bases and training grounds would not be subject to a broad range of environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Noise Control Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and Endangered Species Act.

The legislation worries environmentalists, who note that many military areas have become de facto wildlife refuges for rare and endangered species, which are increasingly threatened by suburban sprawl. Military lands provide a habitat for more than 300 species listed as threatened or endangered, they argue.

"As written, this bill is a license to ravage the earth," says Dan Meyer, general counsel for Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) a Washington-based advocacy group. "Our military does not have to despoil our shores to defend them."

Meyer, a former naval officer, said the proposed legislation is unnecessary because many environmental laws already contain carefully drawn exceptions for military activities. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has the authority to invoke exemptions from environmental protections, but so far has not done so, say critics.

Only a few members of Congress are aware of the draft law, says Meyer. But he noted that since the Sept. 11 attacks, lawmakers are more likely to support the administration's military efforts in its war against terrorism.

A draft of the bill, released by PEER, states: "Federal departments and agencies shall not place the conservation of public lands, or the preservation or recovery of endangered, threatened, or other protected species found on military lands, above the need to ensure that soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines receive the greatest possible preparation for, and protection from, the hazards and rigor of combat through realistic training on military lands and in military airspace."

The bill says that so-called "critical habitat," as defined by the Endangered Species Act, will not be designated on any lands or other areas owned or controlled by the Pentagon or designated for its use. Any action taken by the military that "incidentally results" in the taking of migratory birds or parts, nests, or eggs of such birds would not require a federal permit, says the draft bill.

At a mid-March hearing of the House of Representatives armed services subcommittee, Pentagon officials testified they would seek to include the legislation in the 2003 Defence Authorization Act.

Military leaders said that environmental laws are obstructing their plans to manoeuvre tanks, drop bombs, land amphibious craft on beaches, fly aircraft over certain public lands, fire weapons, and run other military exercises to train troops.

Representative Joel Hefley, a Republican from Colorado who chairs the subcommittee, told the hearing that a number of environmental protections already interfere with military operations.

For example, the Navy must close its bombing ranges on San Clemente Island, off of California, several days a week during the breeding season of a protected bird called the loggerhead shrike. At Fort Hood in Texas, 84 percent of the 81,000-hectare training ground is subject to various limits in order to protect two endangered species and cultural artifacts, Hefley said.

He also pointed out that protecting tidal estuaries, rare plants and shrimp at Camp Pendleton in California limited the land available for combat training.

Paul Mayberry, deputy under secretary of defence, told the subcommittee that U.S. soldiers in Kosovo who had not undergone certain training exercises because of environmental protections, were less effective than those who took the training.

"Both the room to manoeuvre and the ability to fire live ordnance are essential" (to training) said Mayberry.

This is not the first time that the Pentagon has sought exemption from environmental rules. Last year, PEER released a military memo and slide presentation it had obtained that recommended the Pentagon work with Congress to rewrite the Endangered Species Act and other laws.

The memo advised lawmakers to delete all references to "critical habitat" and limit required consultations with wildlife agencies regarding environmental reviews of military activities.