UC Santa Cruz

Combining quantitative and qualitative approaches, I examine the implementation of the Superfund Act on former US military bases, which represent the nation’s most hazardous waste sites. First, I used data from 127 military Superfund sites for a quantitative analysis of how technical (e.g., the severity of contamination), political (e.g., budgetary priorities), and socioeconomic (e.g., race and income) factors contribute to how quickly sites are remediated. I found that the most contaminated sites do get tackled first, contrary to criticisms of Superfund as an inefficient and overly bureaucratic program. Although socioeconomic factors such as race and income seemingly have little effect on the pace of military site cleanups, qualitative fieldwork shows that economically and ethnically marginalized communities can be particularly vulnerable to the residual effects of a history of militarism. My qualitative fieldwork in California and Puerto Rico examines how widely adopted federal policies on environmental justice and community participation influence site cleanups and finds that (1) Communities may suffer from disproportionately poor health status, yet it is outside the jurisdiction of Superfund to redress any lingering effects from historical exposures to military activities. (2) Public participation is low in part because there are no formal mechanisms to ensure agencies are responsive to public input. Furthermore, participation programs are similarly restricted in addressing health concerns or any social impacts related to past military activities. (3) A lack of historical data on military activities and small and mobile populations make it difficult to reconstruct past health exposures. Taken together, these issues confound the ability of the military to implement its own adopted environmental justice strategies and diversify public participation, as well as respond to the broader health, ecological, and social concerns of affected communities. I conclude with policy recommendations, including 1) the implementation of peer-reviewed evaluations of citizen advisory boards, 2) an increase in community capacity to participate in and influence cleanup programs, 3) better coordination of Superfund cleanup programs with existing government initiatives to assess and address disproportionate health impacts, and 4) the orientation of public health studies not at proving a causal relationship between poor health status and military toxins but rather at establishing what basic healthcare and health surveillance is needed at present.