Military’s Toxic Waste Cleanup May Cost 3 to 6 Times 1984 Estimate of $1.5 Billion

WASHINGTON â€”  The cost of cleaning up toxic waste sites at American military installations, pegged at $1.5 billion just a year ago, will probably balloon to $5 billion to $10 billion before the job is completed in the mid-1990s, a Defense Department expert told a House Appropriations subcommittee Wednesday.

But subcommittee legislators, clearly annoyed because cleanups have begun at only 38 of the 434 known military sites, warned the Pentagon to show the same zeal for its anti-pollution war as it does for spending on bombs and bullets.

Carl J. Schafer Jr., the Pentagon’s director of environmental quality, said the cost estimate has risen because the number of dangerous waste sites--and the problems in cleaning them up--have mounted beyond early forecasts. Some 800 dumps, lagoons and polluted water systems eventually could require aid, he said.

Peering Into the Future

“We’re still in a study mode and trying to peer 10 years into the future,� Schafer, a former Environmental Protection Agency official, said in testimony to the House Appropriations subcommittee on military construction. “The cost of cleanup at any given site is also uncertain, and can be expected, if anything, to increase.�

The EPA has said that its own Superfund program, which aims to clean up the country’s 2,000 worst private waste dumps, could cost $22 billion. Schafer said that figure cannot be compared to the Pentagon’s cleanup budget because the military will clean up all of its dumps, even though only 33 are on the Superfund’s “worst� roster. He said another 10 Pentagon sites could be placed on the Superfund list this year.

The military will spend $200 million on cleanups this fiscal year, nearly three times the fiscal 1984 sum, and work could be under way at all sites by 1993, he said.

Optimistic Timetable

But Schafer admitted that the timetable is optimistic. Among other problems, the military cannot find enough qualified hazardous-waste contractors to survey polluted sites. And in at least one case, Schafer said later, a contractor has hauled toxic waste from a military installation to a private landfill that has begun to leak.

The Pentagon probably will be liable for some cleanup costs at the private dump, he said. As a result, the department will stop sending some liquid wastes to landfills when contracts with cleanup companies expire.

Some subcommittee members, armed with a list of complaints about slow cleanup work in their home districts, were unmoved by the military’s troubles.

Bathing in Toxics

Rep. Norman D. Dicks (D-Wash.) complained bitterly that residents near one Washington site have been forced to bathe in toxics-tainted water--and drink bottled water--for two years while the Pentagon and the EPA “finger-pointed� over cleanup costs.

“It takes years and years and years for you guys to (deal) with this,� he told Schafer. “You could do it if you want. You’re just stalling.�

“You can sure get money for the Department of Defense to do this a lot easier than for the EPA,� said Rep. W. G. Hefner (D-N.C.), chairman of the subcommittee.

Dicks hinted that his support for the Pentagon’s MX missile system, scheduled for a House vote next month, rests in part on a decision to build a water system for the residents in his state.

California Rep. Vic Fazio (D-Sacramento), whose district includes potentially dangerous toxic-waste sites at McClellan Air Force Base and the Sacramento Army Depot, said he would propose legislation to place the EPA in charge of military cleanup work. He also proposed giving the Pentagon a separate Superfund budget to finance emergency waste cleanups on military property.

Schafer promised a faster cleanup pace this year, including $7.7 million of work at McClellan, one of the worst sites. Actual waste removal will begin at 27 new sites this year, he said.