220
Washington– Congressman John Fleming, M.D. released the following statement after learning that the Environmental Protection Agency asked for additional oversight costs, estimated to be $8 million, to dispose of the roughly 15 million pounds of M6
Already a subscriber? Log in here
Or, subscribe for unlimited access
8 comments
The Army created this M6 at taxpayer expense, mismanaged the disposal costing additional millions, now the EPA needs more money for a safer method to be used effectively. The U.S. Army has money to burn, but none for safe disposal? Give me a break! Get Homeland Security to tell the Department of Defense this is a serious risk to pubic safety and get it funded NOW. War is costly, pay up.
What documentation do you (John Fleming) have that indicates the EPA is “bait and switch”ing anything not included already as recommendations? Are you referring to EPA’s recommendation to implement an enhanced pollution abatement system? Are you implying that the EPA is delaying the process by recommending this? Your accusations, as usual, are vague, but your feigned concern is familiar.
The additional costs here are necessary for more than just oversight. These costs include key pollution abatement features on the contained burn incinerator, on-site monitoring of the emissions, and disassembly/removal of the incinerator from Camp Minden once this problem is solved. Please recognize that the EPA is the one governmental agency that is currently trying to adhere to the set of Attributes for Safe Disposal that were devised by the Dialogue Committee. The U.S. Army has the duty to come up with any additional funding needed for the safe remedy. $8 million is very reasonable and justified here.
Classic Fleming. What a non-representative!
Congressman Fleming,
What you are characterizing as “extortion” by the EPA is, in reality, the associated cost with a less harmful disposal process. You (and simultaneously, Senator Vitter) are advocating for expenditures only adequate for a return to an open-burn disposal.
What’s equally egregious, but no less expected, is the complete and utter disrespect you exhibit towards the same Dialogue Committee and concerned citizens that have spent months researching safer alternative methods, the same people that you purport to represent.
Knock it off with the tough talk and scare tactics. Who do you REALLY stand for? The US Army or the citizens of NW Louisiana?
I think the Congressman, and the Senator, are guilty of “bait & switch”. They like to cut funding, with the exception of the military, to these regulatory agencies, then turn around and blame them for the problem. Ugh!
Months of research and face-to-face conversations with all involved parties through an EPA facilitated Dialogue Committee resulted in a final facilitator’s report outlining 13 critical attributes for a SAFE disposal and remediation.
And now, John Fleming and David Vitter are claiming extortion by the EPA in requiring that all of these agreed upon attributes be met.
Do not be hoodwinked by the egregiously false and misleading statements by these two congressmen. Call both TODAY, and remind them of the 13 attributes agreed upon by the Camp Minden Dialogue Committee.
Fleming: 202-225-2777
Vitter: 202-224-4623
We were assured by our Senate Committee members, the general at Camp Minden, and our elected officials that safety trumped cost when it comes to disposal of these deadly chemicals.
You represent this district, Mr. Fleming. These are your constituents. Keep your promise to them. Write a check from your campaign fund if necessary, but be sure that your constituents are protected from the danger that you ignored for so many years.
Comments are closed.