Cleaning up the military's toxic legacy.

• Author: Calhoun, Martin L.

More than 100 Defense Department facilities have been placed on the Environmental Protection Agency's list of the worst sites of contamination.

PRES. DWIGHT Eisenhower once said, "The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without." Although he was referring to the dangers of a runaway military-industrial complex, his words just as easily could be applied to the harmful impact of national defense on health, safety, and the environment. Decades of improper and unsafe handling, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials while building and maintaining the world's most powerful fighting force have severely polluted America's air, water, and soil. Fears of the Soviet Union have been replaced by worries that toxic chemical contamination emanating from military bases will find its way into the nation's drinking water.

Throughout the Cold War, America's armed forces remained focused on meeting production goals and carrying out their primary mission of defending the U.S. National security concerns took precedence over ecological ones. These priorities were reflected in the comment of a base commander in Virginia who, in answer to citizen complaints about toxic contamination from his base, stated, "We're in the business of protecting the nation, not the environment."

That was in 1984. No base commander would dare be caught making such a statement in public today. Lately, the military has been taking pains to project a new image and a changed attitude when it comes to environmental matters. "The Department of Defense under the Clinton Administration's leadership is deeply committed to protecting our environment," stated Defense Secretary William Perry. There is growing recognition that a healthy environment is an important part of over-all national security. This is evidenced in the Clinton Administration's creation in 1993 of a new, high-level Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Environmental Security.

Even before that, the military had begun taking significant steps to boost its ecological performance and reputation. As part of a 1990 Defense and the Environment Initiative, Bush Administration Defense Secretary Dick Cheney proclaimed that "the primary mission of the Department of Defense . . . is no excuse for ignoring the environment." In a 1989 memorandum to the Secretaries of the individual military services, Cheney declared, "I want the Department of Defense to be the Federal leader in agency environmental compliance and protection."

The services have responded by incorporating ecological concerns into the daily business of military bases. They even have declared environmental protection to be part of their basic mission. For several years, the military has set forth the goal to reduce the amount of pollution it generates, achieve full and sustained compliance with ecological laws, preserve natural resources, and clean up toxic contamination on bases.

Military efforts to reduce pollution, in particular, already are showing significant results. According to the Pentagon, between 1987 and 1991, the military services cut in half their annual disposal of hazardous wastes. This was achieved by reducing or eliminating the use of certain materials and substituting more environmentally benign alternatives. For example, a process known as "plastic media blasting" now is being used in place of chemical solvents to strip paint and corrosion from aircraft. Plastic beads are blasted from hoses filled with pressurized air, then later recovered from the ground and re-used.

Furthermore, more than 90% of military installations recycle paper, cardboard, newspaper, glass, aluminum, and plastic. The Navy has taken steps to reduce its warships and submarines pollution of the oceans by compacting, storing, off-loading, and burning shipboard wastes and reducing the volume of materials taken on board.

The Pentagon estimates that 80% of the military's hazardous materials are tied to the production, maintenance, and disposal of weapons systems. Therefore, it has adopted a life-cycle approach to hazardous waste reduction that takes environmental costs into consideration in weapons programs from cradle to...