MILITARY SEEKS A PASS ON POLLITION: Enviro laws wouldn't apply to Tstate's bases.

The Sacramento Bee ^ | May 3, 2003 | David Whitney - Bee Wash. Bureau

[madfly]

WASHINGTON -- The fight to exempt the military from various environmental laws moves into the House on Tuesday, and groups ranging from environmentalists to state water districts and the National League of Cities are suiting up for battle with the Pentagon.

[madfly]

Ft. Huachuca is on this list and needs our support!

Committee on Resources
U.S. House of Representatives
1324 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D. C. 20515-6201
(202) 225-2761
Contact the Committee by e-mail at: resources.committee@mail.house.gov.

Email from House Resource Committee today:

Resources Committee to Streamline Regulations for a Stronger National Defense

Washington, D.C. - The House Committee on Resources will hear testimony today, May 6, on H.R. 1835, the National Security Readiness Act of 2003, at 2:00 pm in 1324 Longworth. Sponsored by Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA), H.R. 1835 streamlines environmental regulations to provide a balanced, holistic approach to species protection as our military trains to defend the United States.

"Military readiness and endangered species protection are not mutually-exclusive endeavors," Chairman Richard W. Pombo (R-CA) said. "It is essential that we streamline outdated regulations to reflect this fact. We must ensure that endangered species are not protected at the expense of our troops and our national security. This legislation strikes a common-sense balance that gives our troops flexibility in training to defend the United States, while protecting endangered species at the same time."

H.R. 1835 codifies policy brought forward by the Clinton and Bush administrations that allows Department of Defense to cooperate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in responsibly managing habitat. The bill also amends the Marine Mammal Protection Act, reflecting changes suggested by both the Clinton and Bush administrations and the National Research Council.

"Military bases across the United States, including the two in my district, have stellar records on protecting the environment and endangered species," Rep. Gallegly said. "Under my bill, that will remain part of their mission. But the National Security Readiness Act recognizes that the primary mission of military bases is to prepare and protect the United States from our enemies now and in the future. We endanger ourselves if we fail to allow our bases to train our military men and women and test new weapons systems."

The Committee on Resources will markup the National Security Readiness Act of 2003 tomorrow, May 7, at 11:00 am in Room 1324 on the Longworth House Office Building. For more information on the Resources Committee, please visit http://resourcescommittee.house.gov.

___________________________________________
BILL TEXT (partial)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c108:./temp/~c10854M6wZ

HR 1835 IH

108th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 1835

To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to limit designation as critical habitat of areas owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

April 29, 2003

Mr. GALLEGLY (for himself, Mr. POMBO, Mr. GIBBONS, and Mr. YOUNG of Alaska) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

---

A BILL

To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to limit designation as critical habitat of areas owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `National Security Readiness Act of 2003'.

SEC. 2. MILITARY READINESS AND THE CONSERVATION OF PROTECTED SPECIES.

(a) POLICY REGARDING DUTIES OF FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES- Section 2(c)(1) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531(c)(1)) by inserting after `threatened species' the following: `insofar as is practicable and consistent with their primary purposes'.

(b) DESIGNATION OF CRITICAL HABITAT- Section 4(a)(3) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)) is amended by striking `prudent and determinable' and inserting `necessary'.

(c) LIMITATION ON DESIGNATION OF CRITICAL HABITAT- Section 4(a)(3) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)) is amended--

(1) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as clauses (i) and (ii), respectively;

(2) by inserting `(A)' after `(3)'; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

`(B)(i) The Secretary shall not designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographical areas owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, or designated for its use, that are subject to an integrated natural resources management plan prepared under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines that such plan addresses special management considerations or protection (as those terms are used in section 3(5)(A)(i)).

`(ii) Nothing in this paragraph affects the requirement to consult under section 7(a)(2) with respect to an agency action (as that term is defined in that section).

`(iii) Nothing in this paragraph affects the obligation of the Department of Defense to comply with section 9, including the prohibition preventing extinction and taking of endangered species and threatened species.'.

(d) CONSIDERATION OF EFFECTS OF DESIGNATION OF CRITICAL HABITAT- Section 4(b)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(2)) is amended by inserting `the impact on national security,' after `the economic impact,'.

____________________________

From the Center for Biodiversity's Action Campaign AGAINST this bill!

Stop Pentagon attack on environmental and health laws

Greetings,

The Bush administration is using war in an attempt to gut 30 years of public interest legislation by pushing Congress to exempt the Department of Defense from the Endangered Species Act, toxic cleanup laws (superfund), Marine Mammal Protection Act and Clean Air Act. Arizonans act now to send a fax to Senator McCain urging him to protect our natural heritage and health by stopping this unjust Pentagon push.

_____

(From Center for Biodiversity's action network site)

What's At Stake:
As it was last year, Congress is being asked again to approve a proposal from the Pentagon that would provide the Department of Defense with sweeping new exemptions from the laws that protect our clean water, clean air and wildlife. Additional exemptions being proposed in The Readiness and Range Preservation Initiative are not necessary to accomplish military readiness, and will only threaten our nation's public health and natural heritage.

No government agency should be above the law -- especially the laws that protect the wildlife, air and water in and around our military facilities and the health of the people who live nearby.

The statutes now under fire already allow exemptions on a case-by-case national security basis.

There is no evidence that the military has ever been refused an exemption from these laws when it has been sought, and abundant evidence that cooperative local efforts have produced effective solutions. The military has, time and time again, found solutions to pursue necessary training under existing environmental laws.

Independent and on-the-ground military sources agree that protecting the environment has not compromised readiness. The General Accounting Office (GAO) recently said the DoD has failed to produce evidence that environmental laws or other "encroachments" have significantly affected military readiness.

Christine Whitman, head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, recently testified before the Senate that she has "been working very closely with the Department of Defense and I don't believe that there is a training mission anywhere in the county that is being held up or not taking place because of environmental protection regulation."

The National Park Service also recently warned that the changes being sought "would cause substantial degradation of natural resources."

State and local governments are also opposed.

DoD's proposal ignores concerns expressed by states and local communities directly affected by base operations. The Pentagon's proposal directly contradicts the principle of the Federal Facilities Compliance Act -- passed nearly unanimously in 1992 -- by unnecessarily exempting the DoD from federal laws at the expense of public health, public lands, air and water, and wildlife.

Under this proposal, the Defense Department would be exempted from laws that have long been supported by the American people, including laws that preserve the air and water around our military facilities, protect the health of people who live on or near military bases, and sustain America's wildlife. Last year, with the exception of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), Congress rejected these exemptions and we are requesting that they do the same this year, as well as take action as soon as possible to restore MBTA protections.

Campaign Expiration Date:
June 1, 2003

# # #

[caisson71]

First of all, most environmental laws are NOT supported by the American people. The environmental agenda has been hijacked by liberal bureaucrats and druids. The military can't live with it and neither can most in business.

[madfly]

Ask your congressman to co-sponsor this bill.

EPA US-Mexico Border Program: Border 21 (Agenda 21 ?)

As a result of the partnership among federal, state and local, governments in the United States and Mexico, and with U.S. border tribes, the mission of the Border 2012 program is:

To protect the environment and public health in the U.S.-Mexico border region, consistent with the principles of sustainable development.

(In this program, sustainable development is defined as “conservation-oriented social and economic development that emphasizes the protection and sustainable use of resources, while addressing both current and future needs and present and future impacts of human actions.”)

The U.S.-Mexico border region is one of the most dynamic in the world. It extends more than 3,100 kilometers (2,000 miles) from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean, and 100 kilometers (62.5 miles) on each side of the international border.

http://www.cerc.cr.usgs.gov/fcc/aza.jpg

[SAMWolf]

Bump.

[Kenny Bunk]

Thanks for the map. It clearly shows that the major responsibility for patrolling the border rests with US government agencies.

Why does this not make me feel better?
Well one reason is that while all of these agencies are empowered to keep ME out, Federal law aside (HA!) none of them has any mandate or incentive to keep out the border-bounding bastards who are infesting the Southwest.

The guy who could give them that madate i one executive order: GWB (Acronym for "Guess Which Bush." Get on it George.

[hsmomx3]

Has anyone ever been at a stop light behind a car that has Mexican license plates? Pretty bad and to think we have to come under some rigorous testing in Phoenix.

[madfly]

ping

[cake_crumb]

"....critics released a poll by Zogby International which found that despite strong public support for the war in Iraq, ' more than four out of five likely voters -- 84 percent -- say that government agencies should have to follow the same environmental and public health laws as everyone else.' "

Heheheh...yeah, they should. Let's start by relaxing the ridiculous, feel-good regulations forced upon the public by the environazis.

Part of the Healthy Forests iniative called NOT for lowering standards, as this article implies, but cutting through the unecessary red tape forced upon reasoning individuals by brain-dead leftists. For instance, the Navy is required to a thorough environmental impact study before setting sonar beacons or test new sonar equipment for submarines. We, the general public are not likely gonna have a strong need for sonar beacons or to develop improved sonar technology for our nuclear subs.

After the EO was written, some legislation to clarify was promised. However, if I understood right, the EO will take effect anyway.

We can protect our environment while cutting through the incredibly thick crap forced upon everyone in this country by the EPA. NASA did it in Florida and succeeded admirably. WAY better than the EPA. It's been done once without idiots mucking up the works and making things worse...it can be done again.

[Tailback]

bump for later read

[madfly]

fyi

[CholeraJoe]

Thanks for the ping. I was stationed at Vandenberg AFB. The real reason the Space Shuttle never launched from there was that the envirowackos in the CA State government refused to certify the launch site.

There was an endangered fish, the unarmored three-pronged stickleback (it's not a joke) that lived in a creek near the site.

[madfly]

Update:

Resources Committee Continues Work on National Security Readiness Act Today

Washington, DC - Chairman Richard W. Pombo (R-CA) and the House Committee on Resources is scheduled to finish its work on H.R. 1835, the National Security Readiness Act of 2003 today.  Mr. Pombo will open the committee markup at 11:00 am in 1324 Longworth.

"This measure will allow the Department of Defense to perform its primary function for the American people in a more efficient regulatory fashion," Chairman Pombo said.  "With H.R. 1835, the military will be able to design comprehensive Integrated Natural Resource Management Plans to protect its species, instead of continuing the environmentally-inefficient method of creating a dozen plans for just one parcel of land."

The National Security Readiness Act provides a holistic, balanced regulatory approach for the Department of Defense (DOD) to maximize training for military readiness and enhance endangered species protection.  As manager of 25 million acres and 300 threatened or endangered species, the DOD has been a successful guardian of wildlife ecosystems for many decades.  H.R. 1835 will ensure that this record of protection continues, and most importantly, gives our military the flexibility it needs to train in the post 9/11 world.

"As we move forward in the 21^st Century, common sense and prudence dictate that we become more efficient in all aspects of government, especially defense," Pombo continued.  "This measure does exactly that, as we must double our efforts to facilitate the training of our Armed Services here at home." 

"Any effort to malign this provision as a threat to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is wholly-devoid of fact," Chairman Pombo said.  "Opponents of this measure continue to be more interested in ESA as a political device than as a method to actually protect and recover species in America.  This bill will accomplish the latter in a forward-thinking, comprehensive manner, while giving our military the resources it needs to protect the homeland."    

For more information on H.R. 1835, please contact Doug Heye or Brian Kennedy at the Committee on Resources at (202) 226-9019. 

# # # #

[madfly]

bump

[rightofrush]

The guy who could give them that madate i one executive order: GWB (Acronym for "Guess Which Bush." Get on it George.

It'll never happen. If Atzlan never comes to fruition, it won't be because of GW ("Fox es mi amigo") Bush.