27
under the Clean Water Act; excluding munitions and other DoD equipment from classification as
"solid waste" under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) when they are located
on active training ranges; and allowing the President to declare any military action exempt from
the Coastal Zone Management Act. The draft also granted regulatory relief from the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).
After strong protests were filed by the FWS and EPA against these transparency-reducing
efforts, DoD subsequently modified its original draft. Yet the new draft still called for
significant exemptions from the regulatory processes and procedures of each of these six ENR
laws (IWP 2002a; IWP 2002c). The military, for example, sought a narrower definition of
"harassment" of marine mammals under the MMPA, arguing that the current definition was so
broad that they had to obtain permits for training exercises that involved "relatively benign
operations" (IWP 2003b, 3). Sought as well were a three-year (rather than five-year) delay on
compliance with CAA standards and exclusions for munitions and related pollutants as
hazardous wastes under Superfund and RCRA. In the process, the state and public participation
requirements, and the typically stiffer state regulatory strictures, would be avoided.
Initially, the House Armed Services Committee voted to allow temporary exemptions to
the military for incidental killing of migratory birds during training, and placed restrictions on
how much land the military had to set aside for critical habitat designations. The committee,
however, also rejected the military's requests for a three-year delay in complying with CAA
standards and excluding munitions-related pollutants from Superfund and RCRA regulatory
processes, procedures, and structures (thus preserving transparency in these areas).
Disappointing, too, was language requiring DOI to develop regulations limiting the incidental
taking of migratory birds during training.
Convention