battle ready environmental warriors: challenges, combat and catalyst for change brew c4

8/10/2019 Battle Ready Environmental Warriors: Challenges, Combat and Catalyst for Change BREW C4

1/30


2/30

2 An Adaptive Management Plan for Environmental Action: Operation Enduring Freedom

In February 1991, the tiny country of Kuwait in the Middle East experienced an environmentaldisaster unlike any the world had ever seen, and it was no accident. In a deliberate act of war,invading soldiers from the country of Iraq damaged, destroyed, and ignited hundreds of oil wellsin desert oil fields throughout Kuwait. The Kuwaiti oil fires had a disastrous impact on the

people and wildlife of Kuwait, the economy, and the land, sea, and air of the entire region.

Almost 15 years later, much of the physical and environmental damage remains, and scientistsare still tracking pollution levels and health histories of people in the regions that surroundedthe fires.

-Kristine Herschmann,The Kuwaiti Oil Fires

War. What is it good for? Edwin Starr

The impact of armed conflict on the environment has been acknowledged for many years and was

formally addressed by the United Nations in the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other

Hostile Use of Environmental Modifications Technique (ENMOD). The enormity of this impact became

visibly apparent to the worlds population during the first Gulf War, when Iraq released enormous

quantities of oil into the Persian Gulf (McLaren & Willmore, 2003).

To address the impacts from intentional environmental destruction during war, the International

Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) developed guidelines for military manuals and instructions on the

protection of the environment during times of armed conflict; paragraph 702 of these guideline states

Damage which is not militarily necessary may not be inflict ed. A lso included in these guidelines, is the

tenet environmental agreements and customary law may continue to apply (Henckaerts, 2000).

According to Gasser (1995) a group of experts convened by the Canadian Ministry of External

Affairs in Ottawa, July 1992 made the point rules of general (peacetime) law protecting the natural

environment remain applicable during armed conflict (p. 639).

Protecting the environment from acts of war, e.g. wanton destruction, is addressed by several

international laws and protocols, as well as by the rules and principles of International Humanitarian Law

(Bouvier, 1991). It is the day-to-day operations, activities and maintenance, the human and material

footprint from deployments of troops which are causing an adverse environmental impact (Waleij &

Lijedahl, 2009).


3/30


Environmental damage during war or armed conflict is inevitable. This fact makes policies and

programs designed to minimize the amount of damage incurred during contingency operations of

considerable importance.

The Issue

Allied Forces in Afghanistan, as well as the businesses and organizations, who work to support

them, face significant challenges in the effort to implement existing environmental policies and programs.

Basic Facts

Afghanistan is an immense, land-locked country approximately the size of Texas with a population

of around 24 million. It is a land of massive mountain ranges and remote valleys in the north and east and

near desert-like conditions on the plains to the south and west (Center of Military History, 2004). The

following statistics were collected by the United Nations Environment Programme (2009):

Up to 80% of Afghans are directly dependent on natural resources for income and sustenance.

Agriculture provides livelihoods for more than 60% of the population.

Approximately 75% of Afghanistan is vulnerable to desertification.

Some 85- 90% of the countrys water is taken from surface sources and 10 -15% from below the

ground.

Background

The war in Afghanistan, known as Operation Enduring Freedom, began October 7, 2001 as a joint

US-UK mission in response to the Sept 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center.

The Bonn Agreement of 5 December 2001 requested the United Nations to authorize the

development of a security force to assist in maintaining security in Kabul and its surrounding areas. On 20

December 2001, the UN Security Council approved the first resolution authorizing the International

Security Assistance Force (ISAF). This military presence is now considered a peacekeeping mission.


4/30


According to NATO (2011) ISAFs key priorities in Afghanistan are:

Protect the Afghan people;

Build the capacity of the Afghan Security Forces so they can take lead responsibility for security

in their own country;

Counter the insurgency; and

Enable the delivery of stronger governance and development.

NATO-ISAF consists of 48 troop contributing nations and 28 Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs)

Photo credit: http://www.isaf.nato.int/images/stories/File/Placemats/PLACEMAT.MARCH%2004..pdf

Economics

Military base closure is a lengthy and expensive process. Environmental cleanup requirements for

domestic military base closure are detailed, specific and must comply with numerous environmental laws,

including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
http://www.isaf.nato.int/images/stories/File/Placemats/PLACEMAT.MARCH%2004..pdfhttp://www.isaf.nato.int/images/stories/File/Placemats/PLACEMAT.MARCH%2004..pdfhttp://www.isaf.nato.int/images/stories/File/Placemats/PLACEMAT.MARCH%2004..pdf


5/30


Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),

as well as state environmental statutes (Myers, 2010).

A significant disparity exists between the requirements for domestic base closures and base

closures overseas. The existing Department of Defense (DoD) overseas remediation policy is not nearly

as strict as that required by domestic law (Lindsey-Poland & Morgan, 1998). According to Lindsey-

Poland et al., only the absolute minimum of environmental restoration at overseas bases is implemented.

Even so, environmental cleanup costs abroad are more than initially anticipated. In 1992 the federal

government planned to spend $1 billion on environmental remediation for overseas base closure, but later

research determined the cost of cleaning up Germany alone would exceed $3 billion (Myers, 2010).

Regardless of the difference between regulatory requirements abroad, failing to effectively remove

environmental contaminates from overseas bases can cause significant impact on our ability to maintain

constructive relations with foreign countries and further damage the United States reputation abroad.

Security

The debate concerning if the continual decline in environmental conditions will lead to an increase

in violent conflict has created significant controversy (Gleditsch, 1998). In the sense of a peacekeeping

mission, a large body of academic literature and case studies has shown that failing to provide for the

environmental needs of the citizens in a war-torn society will only make the (peacekeeping) task more

difficult (Conca & Wallace, 2009). In fact, Conca et al., maintain that shared environmental challenges

may create opportunities for peace building and that cooperative sharing of environmental knowledge can

be a useful tool to build the citizens confidence in the military presence.

According to the ISAF Commanders Counterinsurgency Guidance Document (ISAF, 2009) the

Afghan people will decide who wins the fight and their answer will be based on rational choices on who

can better protect them, provide for their needs, respect their dignity and their community, and offer

opportunities for the future. As an example, consider the following:


6/30


An ISAF unit in a relatively tolerant area had a difficult time maneuvering large vehicles along a

road because it was lined with fruit trees. To improve mobility, the unit had the trees cut down.

Many people in the village had their livelihoods destroyed. IEDs began appearing along the road

shortly thereafter. (p. 2)

Health

The current health of troops contributes directly to the security of the operation, while the potential

health impacts related to environmental practices will impact future liabilities.

U.S. military operations in Afghanistan generate about 10 pounds of solid waste per soldier (Navy,

Army, Marine Corps and Air Force) per day; this figure does not include other Department of Defense

components or contractors (GAO, 2010). To avoid public health risks and other problems this waste

(plastic, Styrofoam, food scraps, discarded electronics, shipping materials, appliances, mattresses,

clothing, tires, metal containers, treated wood, batteries, etc) must be handled expeditiously. To

accomplish this task, wide spread use of burn pits have been employed since the beginning of United

States military presence in Afghanistan since 2001 (Kurera, 2010).

Open pit burning contributes to particle pollution and the EPA has identified several health

problems associated with particulate exposure, such as irritation of the airways, coughing, difficulty

breathing, decreased lung function, aggravated asthma, development of chronic bronchitis, irregular

heartbeat, nonfatal heart attacks and premature death in people with heart or lung disease (GAO, 2010).

Not only is the use of burn pits for waste disposal expressly prohibited by the Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act (RCRA, 2006), it is also addressed by the U.S DoD Overseas Environmental Baseline

Guidance Document, 5715.5-G (2007) in Chapter 7on Solid Waste Where burning is the method,

incinerators meeting air quality require ments of Chapter 2, Air Emissions, will be used (p. 94).

The use of burn pits is noted by various DOD guidance documents, standard operating procedures

and policies; however none of these documents explicitly prohibit the use of burn pits. Instead these

documents provide instructions on when, where and how burn pits can be used. Although these same


7/30


documents include directions such as, in the United States Department of the Army, MED 593 (2006)

only using open burning in emergency situations , (p. 7), DoD Instruction 4715.19 (2011) burn pits

should be a short-term solution during contingency operations where no other alternative is feasible , (p.

2) and DoD Guidance 4715.05-G (2007) open burning will not be the regular method of solid waste

disposal, (p.94) as of August 2010 U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) reported there were 251 active

burn pits in Afghanistan (GAO, 2010).

Vision Statement

Battle Ready Environmental Warriors: Challenges, Combat and Catalyst for Change

(BREWC4) seeks to overcome the challenges preventing the implementation of existing environmental

policies, resulting in improved environmental protection, healthier troops, and increased local confidence

in the mission of NATO-ISAF.

Identified Stakeholders

International Security Assistance Force- Commander ISAF

- Deputy Commander ISAF- Chief of Staff ISAF- Deputy Chief of Staff Operations ISAF- ISJ Commander, ISAF Joint Command- ISAF Regional Commander, Southwest- ISAF Regional Commander, Capital- ISAF Regional Commander, North- ISAF Regional Commander, West- ISAF Regional Commander, South- ISAF Regional Commander, East

Armed Forces- Division Commanders- Brigade Commanders- Battalion Commanders- Company Commanders- Platoon Commanders


8/30


- Squad Commanders- NCOs and enlisted

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Disposition Services- Disposal Region CENTCOM

Afghanistan National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA)- Director General- Head of Division of International Environmental Affair- United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Resident Coordinator- UNDP Environmental Officer

Representatives from each defense contractor in theatre

United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA)- Regional and Provincial Field Offices

United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)- Post Conflict and Disaster Management Branch, Kabul, Afghanistan

The World Bank Group- Afghanistan, Projects & Programs Country Director

Various Universities throughout Afghanistan- American University of Afghanistan- Kabul University- Ghazni University- Balkh University- Polytechnical University of Kabul

Nongovernmental Wildlife Conservation Society

Society for Afghanistan Volunteer Environmentalists (SAVE)

Getting Started

BREWC4s first task will be to determine what is preventing the implementation of existing

policies and programs designed for environmental protection. This task will be determined through

literature and field research, surveys and shareholder feedback.


9/30


10/30


Additional changes to structure and or reporting may also be required, depending upon the results

of implementation and rollout.

Materials/Data Needed

Troop and contractor surveys

Feasibility studies for alternative methods of waste disposal, to include source reduction, minimizationand recycling

Cost benefit analysis on waste management alternatives to include avoided future costs of potential healtheffects

The number and type of local alternatives available, i.e. landfills, incinerators, recycling facilities, etc. areneeded

Full waste stream analysis (military and contractors)

Improved contractor oversight

Air and water quality baseline studies and monitoring

Health studies on burn pit exposure

Possible Outcomes

Two basic potential outcomes of this project can be predicted, negative or positive acceptance.

Positive

Top ISAF Command recognizes the value, both to the environment and to the mission objectives

and dedicates resources to ensuring the success of the project. Top command commitment is visible and

active involvement is demonstrated.

Negative

If commitment from top commanders is not visible and sincere, the chances of getting lower ranks

to participate will diminish with each level of command. This in of itself will lead to failure of the entire

project.


11/30


Measuring Acceptance

Commitment from the top down will be determined by emphasis given to attendance to meetings,

participation and feedback of shareholders, resources allocated, and interest/enthusiasm generated at all

levels. Top ISAF and CENTCOM Commanders attendance to initial base town hall meetings will be one

method of measuring top command commitment to the project overall.

Project Targets

Barriers to implementing existing environmental policies and programs identified by 07-31- 2011

Options to overcome barriers identified and prioritized by 09-31-2011

Amount of waste per soldier reduced by 20% by 12-31-2011, as measured per site.

Amount of waste per soldier reduced by 40% by 06-30-2012, as measured per site.

50% reduction in respiratory illness reported by troops measured by visits with medical staff while

deployed in Afghanistan

Number of active burn pits in Afghanistan reduced by 25% by 12-31-2011



All active burn pits are in compliance with CENTCOM Regulation 200-2 by 12-31-2011, as

demonstrated by DCMA inspection reports and shareholder feedback.


12/30


Identified Objectives/Plans

Assess

Objective 1 Open & effective communication between all military, civilian contractors andAfghan stakeholders

Methods Solicit English speaking volunteers from Military Units to interpret and hire a localinterpreter

Monthly NATO-ISAF/contractor stakeholder meetings (location specific)

Quarterly NATO-ISAF/contractor Task Force meetings (representatives from eachlocation, contractor, technical experts, and regional representatives)

Any reports or documents generated by BREWC4 will be made available in eachstakeholders native tongue

Predictions Some amount of information will be lost in translation

Participation from non-English speaking troops may be weak, at best.

Logistics of military action and transport between bases may limit attendance at thequarterly meetings

Measures Percentage of non-English speaking troops participation

Participation and attendance at site specific stakeholder meetings

Participation and attendance at quarterly meetings

Consensus and willingness to compromise among shareholders

Uncertainties Sustained military/political support

Funding

Design

BREWC4 is designed to initially involve military and contractor personnel who work and live on militaryinstillations in Afghanistan. Open communication is needed to identify the reasons current policy and

programs are not being implemented. The involvement of a diverse group of individuals will providedifferent perspectives and ideas on how to overcome these challenges.

In the later stages of the project, BREWC4 plans to involve local and government officials, including

respected professors from the various universities. This involvement will allow for the transfer ofknowledge and past experience concerning environmental stewardship and protection. Monitor

Details of troop involvement during awareness, training and community meetings will be kept. Eachindividual situation will determine how these numbers are verified.

Site specific stakeholder meetings will be conducted on a monthly basis and attendance will be kept by


13/30


using a sign in sheet. All stakeholders will be encouraged to participate.

Task Force meetings will be held on a quarterly basis and attendance will be kept documented in themeeting minutes (responsibility for taking meeting minutes will be assigned). Ability to compromiseamong this group will also be captured in the minutes.

Evaluate

Participation from English speaking troops and non English speaking troops will be compared.

Attendance to stakeholder meetings vs. number of identified stakeholder groups will be examined.

Task Force members are the SMEs assigned to the project along with an appointed representative fromeach site (larger sites may have more than one appointed representative). Task Force members arerequired to attend each quarterly meeting; the percentage of attendance and names of attendees will bereported in the quarterly Task Force Summary Report.

Adjust

Examine how cultural differences could be impacting open & effective communication; altercommunication style. Evaluate providing an incentive for attendance to the site specific stakeholdermeetings. If Task Force attendance is problematic, alternate locations will be assessed.


14/30


Assess

Objective 2 Identify barriers to implementing existing environmental policies and programs,determine options to overcome barriers and rank those options according to leastexpensive and easiest to implement

Methods Conduct troop and contractor surveys and interviews; have stakeholder brainstormingsessions; conduct literature research, perform root-cause, fault tree or other scientificmethod of analysis.

Survey, interview and brainstorming session results will be used to identify barriers.Prioritize according to easiest to implement, cheapest to implement and greatest potentialimpact.

Locate or conduct a feasibility study on waste treatment/ disposal options, ie composting,recycling, etc including full waste stream analysis. Assess availability of local facilitiesand resources. Perform or locate cost benefit analysis on alternative waste managementoptions.

Predictions Survey returns are below norm or extremely below norm. Military personnel unwilling oruncomfortable answering interview questions (fear of reprisal). Lack of consensus among

participants or negative feedback/attitude. Scientific uncertainty or perceived need formore information results in slow decision making and inaction.

Waste treatment/disposal option feasibility studies data exists, but is not applicable tomilitary installations. Cost benefit analysis on alternative waste management optionsexists, but does not include implication of health concerns. Lack of consensus whichoptions are cheapest or easiest to implement. Availability of local facilities or resources isminimal at best; areas where facilities are available are not logistically feasible for allsites.

Measures Percentage of survey returns, number of interviews conducted, stakeholder attendance at brainstorming session.

Waste stream analysis report, report on waste treatment feasibility study, report on cost benefit analysis of alternative waste management options compared with continued use of burn pits.

Report detailing number and type of local facilities available and distance from each site.

Report listing the identified challenges, recommended options and ranking.

Uncertainties Being in a contingency environment brings a certain level of uncertainty into everything.

Support and willingness of troops and contractors to participate.Military Command commitment.Available funding for alternative waste disposal methods.

Design

A survey questionnaire will be developed to determine level of environmental awareness, level ofenvironmental concern and population consensus of the reason existing policies and programs are not

being followed. Percentage of survey returns are normally low; to improve this percentage drop boxes


15/30


and survey forms will be available at various locations around the site. Individual interviews will bevoluntary on a walk-in basis and completely confidential. No name will be documented on either theinterview report or the survey. To minimize negative feedback/attitudes, brain storming session rules will

be clearly established and communicated. Any person unwilling to comply with these fair and simplerules will be asked to leave. To prevent a stalemate or slow progress, a maximum time for data collectionduring this phase the project will be established.

The ability of BREWC4 to prioritize implementation of measures by ranking according to easiest andcheapest to implement will provide the opportunity to quickly demonstrate progress. This will alsodemonstrate to command not all changes are expensive and hard to implement leading to greatercommitment for the more costly and difficult options.

Monitor

The number of returned surveys, number of interviews, brain storming session attendance and on timecompletion of this phase for each site will be noted.

Time to complete analysis and develop action plan for implementation.

Number of options identified, cost and time to implement.

Evaluate

Percentage of surveys returned vs. site population

Number of interviews conducted and willingness to participate.

Outcome of brain storming sessions; positive or negative.

Time and cost to implement identified options

Adjust

In the event survey returns are below the norm, the Task Force will examine providing an incentive forreturns. Other needed adjustments may be identified during this phase, such as extra time is needed or notas much time is needed for completion, or brain storming session attendance limited to max number of

participants. Adapt existing studies, as available to meet military installation demands. Implement votingmeasures to reach consensus. Other adjustments will be made as needed based on stakeholder input.


16/30


Assess

Objective 3 Implement identified options to overcome barriers.

Methods Implementation will begin with the focus on waste management, specifically byimproving segregation of waste streams at the source of generation, beginning a

recycling program., starting a compost area (if determined feasible), and establishingcontracts with local service providers.

Predictions Minimal participation to waste segregation by waste generators, trash and rubbish placedin with recyclables and vice versa, compost pile leads to increase in vector population.

Measures Weekly observation reports on waste segregation, material recycled, vector populationand status of compost pile.

Uncertainties Stakeholder commitment and participation.Does composting impact vector population?

Design

To successfully manage waste, a plan must be put into place. Waste segregation must be easy and simplefor the generator; they should not have to go out of their way in order to separate the trash. Use of colorcoded bins to distinguish between different waste streams may be effective. Placing bins at strategiclocations around the camp and providing drop points for items such as batteries, WEEE (Waste Electronicand Electrical Equipment), and aerosol cans will improve the chances of success.

Monitor

Participation of troops and contractors determined by amount of waste segregation occurring, amount ofmaterial being recycled, vector population at compost pile and number of local service provider contractsin place.

Evaluate

Percentage of recyclable material collected vs. consumption.

Decrease in amount of waste for disposal.

Vector population vs. baseline.

Number of and distance to local facilities in each area of operation.

Adjust

Movement of waste bins, increase in number of locations as needed based on outcome of evaluations.Increase vector control in area of composting, provide feedback forms or conduct additional surveys todetermine lack of participation in recycling program

Evaluate landfills (dumps) vs. compost for difference in vector populations, conduct education andawareness training, implement ad campaign.


17/30


Assess

Objective 4 Improved environmental performance

Methods Conduct educational briefings i.e. town hall meetings to increase awareness , promote base camp life as a community, celebrate environmental protection by participating in site

wide environmental events, such as Earth Day, International Day for Preventing theExploitation of the Environment in War , etc. Have a competition for The BestEnvironmental Performers on a team basis; teams will be made up of a individual units,companies, etc.

Predictions Being away from home, promoting base camp life as a community will be readilyaccepted. Military units tend to be very competitive, so participation in the contest isexpected to be high.

Town hall meetings get off track of subject or become a compliant session.

Improved environmental performance in Afghanistan is not seen as serious.

Measures Attendance at town hall meetings must be small enough to maintain order and direction.

Camp visit by upper level Military Command to promote improved environmental performance will provide credibility.

Uncertainties Stakeholder commitment and participation.

Military command commitment to time and resources.

Design

Promoting the base camp life as a community will instill a sense of home for those who are so far away

from home. If this were my back yard would I throw rubbish around? Providing the opportunity for unitsto participate in a friendly competition will encourage participation, as troops tend to be very competitivealready. Several town hall sessions will be conducted at each site to allow for maximum attendance.

Monitor

Troop and contractor attendance and participation during town hall meetings, contests and events.

Evaluate

Percentage of population attending town hall meetings less than 50%.

Percentage of units/companies participating in BEP contest less than 30%.

Percentage of population participating in Environmental events less than 30%.

Adjust

Provide T-shirts to participants of environmental events, Earth Day 2012 Afghanistan; providerefreshments at meetings to encourage participation; prize to winner of BEP should be substantial enoughto encourage participation. Other adjustments to be made as needed.


18/30


Assess

Objective 5 Maximize waste reduction

Methods Reducing the amount of waste generated will be accomplished by promoting the principleof the 3 Rs; Reuse, Reduce & Recycle.

Predictions Throwing unwanted items away is always easier than taking them to a collection point fordonation.

Measures Task force quarterly report to include data on amount of material being donated for reuse,amount of recycled material and amount of reduction in waste per soldier per day.

Uncertainties Stakeholder commitment and participation.

Military Command commitment.

Design

BREWC4 will promote the 3Rs principle by simple ad campaign utilizing AFN TV and Radio. Inaddition, a collection point will be established where soldiers and contractors can donate items they nolonger use or want. The distribution of these donated items will be determined by consensus of the taskforce. Examples could be operation of a second hand store, with the proceeds being donated to an ArmedForces Charity or the goods could be donated to a local charity, such as an orphanage.

Monitor

Amount of waste generated, number and types of items donated, amount of material recycled.

Evaluate

Reduction of waste generated per soldier per day vs. baseline

Adjust

Increase awareness and education training; examine level of military command commitment, increasenumber and type of ads to include the possibilities of billboards or incentive for donating unwanted items.


19/30


Assess

Objective 6 Minimize potential health impacts

Methods Air and water quality baseline studies and monitoring; conduct health studies on burn pitexposure

Predictions Air and water quality is below WHO recommended guidelines; burn pit exposure healthstudies already underway. Political and upper command military resistance to conductair and water quality monitoring due to implicated liabilities.

Measures Air and water quality results provided to the site population via monthly reports in Starsand Stripes Newspaper and other media.

Task force quarterly report to include air and water quality data.

Uncertainties Political and upper level military command agreement to conduct air and water qualitymonitoring. Could be presented as lack of funding or impractical to implement.

Design

BREWC4 will implement air and water quality monitoring programs; these results will be provided to thegeneral population on base. This will be done to promote the wearing of dust masks, especially on daysof high particulate load. Water quality results will aid to promote protection of the environment as a largeamount of the water used on base comes from wells and bore holes. With approval, air quality can be

posted outside DFACs similar to PPE levels, i.e. green, yellow, orange, red & black.

Monitor

Air and water quality, number of individuals reporting respiratory distress, and types of waste being sentto burn pits.

Evaluate

Number of individuals reporting respiratory distress vs. baseline (could use numbers from US forcomparison)

Frequency of burn pit operation, distance from burn pits to living areas, frequency of noncompliant itemssent to burn pit

Adjust

Consider relocation of mission essential burn pits, ensure prohibited items are not being burned; promoteself reporting by contractors operating burn pits, segregate and report unauthorized items vs. burningthem.


20/30


Assess

Objective 7 Minimize use of burn pits and when their use is considered mission critical, ensureguidance on safe operation of burn pits is followed (location, prohibited items, etc).

Methods Implementation of this project will result in a decrease in the use of burn pits. In order to

truly minimize their use, other methods of waste disposal are required. Cost benefitanalysis should provide answers as to which methods are most cost effective, i.e. landfillsor incinerators.

Encouraging self reporting of contractors operating the burn pits will reduce prohibiteditems from being burned, as well as waste segregation, reuse, reduce and recycle.Initially, more focus on audits and evaluation of burn pit use is indicated; however, asresidents see improvements in air quality and overall health, self enforcement will becomethe active method of control.

Predictions If political and military command support and commitment is visible and positive, thetroops and contractors are more likely to participate and be positive about this project.

This will result in a decrease in the number of burn pits in operation.If political and military command support and commitment is not visible and or positive,the troops and contractors are less likely to participate and be positive about this project.This project will have minimal impact on the number of burn pits in operation.

Measures Task force quarterly reports to include data on number of burn pits in operation, numberof burn pits closed and any new burn pits opened. Also included in this report will beinformation on burn pits which are mission critical, their distance from living areas andamount/type of prohibited items sent to burn pits.

Uncertainties Political and military command commitment.

Troop and contractor commitment.

Available funding.

Design

Successful implementation of this project will result in a decrease in the number of burn pits in operation.Those burn pits considered mission critical will not burn prohibited items as a regular method ofoperation and they will be located the minimal distance from living areas.

Monitor

Number of burn pits in operation, occurrences of prohibited items sent to mission critical burn pits.

Evaluate

Distance from mission critical burn pits to living areas.

Number of burn pits closed per month; number of new burn pits opened per month.

Types of prohibited items being sent to burn pits.


21/30


Adjust

Number and location of drop points for prohibited waste items; seek to understand lack of political andmilitary command support, consider involvement of the press and local Afghan Environmental ProtectionAgency. Other adjustments as identified by stakeholders.

Potential Challenges

Goals &Objectives

ImplementedAction(s)

Trigger Possible NextSteps/Actions

Feasibility of NextSteps/Actions

Open & effectivecommunication

between allmilitary,contractor andAfghan

stakeholders

Solicit Englishspeakingvolunteers fromMilitary Units tointerpret and hire alocal interpreter

Non Englishspeaking NATOtroops

participation below 30%

Examine howcultural differencescould be impactingopen & effectivecommunication;alter communication

style

Understandingcultural differencescan be critical toeffectivecommunication andchanges easily made

Afghanstakeholderinvolvementimpossible

Limit Afghan participation togovernment anduniversity officials

This will be easierto manage; howevertime to get anyAfghan local on

base can be timeconsuming

Monthly NATO-ISAF/contractorstakeholdermeetings (locationspecific)

Attendance & participation below 30%

Provide incentivefor attendingmeetings, food,drink, show a movieafterwards, etc

Logistics workedwith food service;MWR

Quarterly NATO-ISAF/contractorTask Forcemeetings(representativesfrom eachlocation,contractor,technical experts,and regionalrepresentatives)

Attendance & participation below 75%

Consider alternatelocations formeetings

Meetings could beheld in Dubai orPakistan

Security of meetinglocation could limitoptions

Cost, logistics andavailable staffingremaining in theatrecould limitfeasibility


22/30


Goals &Objectives




Identify barriers toimplementingexistingenvironmental

policies and programs

Conduct troop andcontractor surveysand interviews

Percentage ofsurvey returns

below 30%

Include incentivewhen surveys aresent; follow uprequests offeringan additionalincentive forreturn

Depending on typeof incentive, could

be costlyconsidering thenumber of troopsin theatre Seekdonations fromonsite vendors

Willingness ofrespondents toanswer questions

Ensureconfidentialityfrom feedback;respondents arenot identified

Do not requirenames on surveys;interviews are notconducted bychain of command

Literature researchand surveys Scientificuncertainty or othercauses result inslow decisionmaking andinaction

Education of participants;scientificuncertainty willalways existEmphasis on smallsteps; some actionis better than none

By focusing onsmall steps, thetask(s) is lessoverwhelming and

becomesachievable

Shareholder brainstormingsessions;

Lack of consensusamong participantsor negativefeedback/attitude

Seek middleground; avoidcontroversialissues; seek to

understand theindividuals pointof view; empower

participants

Empowering participants toaction could provedifficult due to

available time,funding andmission objectives(command)

Conduct root-cause/fault tree orother scientificmethod of analysis

Scientificuncertainty or othercauses result inslow decisionmaking andinaction

Education of participants;scientificuncertainty willalways existEmphasis on smallsteps; some actionis better than none

By focusing onsmall steps, thetask(s) is lessoverwhelming and

becomesachievable


23/30


Goals &Objectives




Identify and prioritizeoptions toovercome

barriers

Prioritize accordingto easiest toimplement,cheapest toimplement andgreatest potentialimpact

Lack ofconsensusamong

participants

Seek compromise,conduct independent(anonymous)voting/ranking ofoptions to reachconsensus

Easily implemented by using simpleranking tables/charts

Conduct feasibilitystudy on wastetreatment/ disposaloptions, iecomposting,recycling, etcincluding full wastestream analysis

Slow or limited progress

Determine cause ofslow progress;assign additionalresources if needed

Availability ofadditional resourcescan be limited

Assess availabilityof local facilitiesand resources

Number andtype of localresources andfacilitiesavailable in eacharea of operation

Short term:Consider purchaseor construction onlarger bases; assesstransboundarymovement

Funding for purchase orconstruction may not

be availableTransboundarymovement iscumbersome

Long term: InvolveAfghan stakeholdersto seek developmentof facilities;

Feasible, but will notmeet timeconstraints

Perform cost benefit analysis onalternative wastemanagementoptions

Slow or limited progress Determine cause ofslow progress;assign additionalresources if needed

Availability ofadditional resourcescan be limited


24/30


Goals &Objectives




Implementidentifiedoptions toovercome

barriers

Improve wastesegregation at thesource

Observation ofsignificantresistance towaste segregation

by wastegenerator

Access logistics ofsegregation; must

be simple andconvenient for thewaste generator

Layout of DFACsand availablespace could be a

potential problem

Recycling (aluminum, plastic, metal)

% of recyclablematerial collectedvs. % ofrecyclablematerial used

below 1:2

Supply feedbackforms, conductadditional surveysconcerning

participation

Surveys are simpleto implement;getting response isnot

Composting Increase in vector population vs. baseline

Increase vectorcontrol in compostarea; consultexperts oncause/solutions

An increase invector populationcreates a risk totroop health andthus the mission;composting maynot be feasible

Establish servicecontracts with localfacilities/resources

Number of anddistance to localfacilities in eacharea of operation

Consider purchase(cost benefitanalysis) of onsiteincinerators forlocations wheredistance to service

provider is an issue

Availability offunding; shippingor constructiontime

Compliance of

local service providers toenvironmentalstewardship

Involvement of

Afghanistans NEPA; conducteducation &awarenesscampaigns for localservice providers

Environmental

stewardship toAfghanistan maynot equal westernworldrequirements;availability offunding could also

be an issue


25/30


Goals &Objectives




Improvedenvironmental

performance

Contests betweenunits (bestenvironmental

performer, etc)

% of units participating incontest below30%

Offer incentive towinner of 2 beers

per unit member

This is feasible as ithas been done in the

past, however it willrequire upper level(CENTCOM)command approval

Conducteducational

briefings i.e. townhall meetings toincrease awareness

Percentage of populationattendance

below 50%

Offer refreshmentsduring meetingssuch as cookies,cakes, juice, soda,etc

Logistics to beworked with foodservices

Participate in sitewide environmentalevents, i.e. EarthDay, InternationalDay for Preventingthe Exploitation ofthe Environment inWar

Percentage of participation below 30% persite

Promote living on base as being partof a community;

promotecommunityinvolvement

Simple advertisingcampaign, postings,AFRTS (AmericanForces Radio &Television Services)and AFN (ArmedForces NetworkEurope), etc

Provide T-shirts to participants

Feasible if cost isminimized byseeking corporateand environmentaldonors/sponsors

Waste reduction Minimize theamount of wastegenerated by

promoting the principles reduce,reuse and recycle(Three Rs)

Less than 10%reduction inwaste

generation persoldier per day

Increaseawareness andeducation; look at

troop commandercommitment

Commandercommitment iscritical to success

Gaining thiscommitment rests ondemonstrating

program improvesmission success


26/30


Goals &Objectives




Minimize potential healthimpacts

Air and waterquality baselinestudies andmonitoring

Air or waterquality results

below theminimumestablished byWHO

Provide andencourage wearingof dust masks;utilize alternatesource of water;

post air qualityindicators (similarto weather in US)

Drinking water isnot an issue as

bottled water isshipped in, cost oftrucking water fromdifferent locationcan be costly;military use ofROWPU; dustmasks are feasible,

but will peoplewear them?

Conduct healthstudies on burn pitexposure

Number ofindividualsreportingrespiratorydistress increasesvs. baseline

Audit reports onwaste disposal

practices

Examine air qualitydata; considerrelocation ofmission essential

burn pits; contractwith local wastedisposal providersEnsure prohibiteditems are not being

burned; promoteself reporting bycontractors

Certain FOBs aresmall andrelocation of burn

pit may not befeasible;

Better policing of burn pit operationrequires additionalresources whichmay not beavailable; fear ofcontract loss due toerrors may preventcontractors fromself reporting


27/30


Goals &Objectives




Minimize use of burn pits

All of the aboveimplementedactions should leadto reduced use of

burn pits

Less than 25%reduction of

burn pits inoperation by31-Dec-2011


burn pits inoperation by31-Jun-2012


burn pits inoperation by31-Dec-2012

Conduct audits on burn pit location,type of items being

burned, etc todetermine NATOcompliance withexisting burn pitregulations

Investigate status ofconstruction and

purchase process forincinerators

Disciplinary action

Consider if use of burn pit is actuallymission critical ormerely convenient;use of burn pitsalready requiresupper commandsignature and is notalways followed

Prefer disciplinaryaction be avoided;instills a police stateof compliance ratherthan voluntarycommunity do theright thingmotivation

When use of burn pits isconsideredmission critical,ensure guidanceon safe operationof burn pits isfollowed(location,

prohibited items,etc)

Waste segregationat the source;improved oversightof contractorsoperating burn pits

Change innumber of burn

pits in operation

Audit results onoperation of

burn pits; nomission

justification foruse

Review obstacles preventingimplementation ofcurrent policies and

programs; conductroot cause analysis

Implementation of program in phases; base by base isrecommended tolimit costly mistakesdue tomisidentification ofobstacles


28/30


Literature Cited:

Bouvier, A. (1991) Protection of the Natural Environment in Time of Armed Conflict.

International Review of the Red Cross, No. 285 , p. 567-578.

Bunker, A. L. (2004). Protection of the Environment during Armed Conflict: One Gulf, Two

Wars. RECIEL 13 (2), p. 201-213.

Center of Military History. (2004). The United States Army in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring

Freedom. CMH Pub 70-83-1.

Conca , K. and Wallace, J. (2009). Environment and Peacebuilding in War-torn Societies:

Lessons from the UN Environment Programme s Experience with Postconflict Assessment.

Global Governance, Vol. 15(4), p. 485-504

Gasser, H. (1995). For Better Protection of the Natural Environment during Armed Conflict: A

proposal for action. American Journal of International Law, Vol 89 , p. 637-644.

Gleditsch, N. P. (1998). Armed Conflict and the Environment: A critique of the literature.

Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 35 (3), p. 381-400.

Henckaerts, J.M. (2000). Towards Better Protection of the Environment in Armed Conflict:

Recent Developments in International Humanitarian Law. Reciel 9 (1) ISSN:0962 8797.

Herschmann, K. (2005). Introduction. In M. Levine, Environmental Disasters: The Kuwaiti Oil Fires (p

ix). New York, NY: Facts on File, Inc.

ISAF Commanders Counterinsurgency Guidance (2009). NATO Headquarters International

Security Assistance Force, Kabul, Afghanistan.

Kurera, K. D. (2010) Military Burn Pits in Iraq and Afghanistan: Considerations and Obstacles

for Emerging Litigation. Pace Environmental Law Review, Vol. 28 (1), pp. 288-317.

Lindsay-Poland, J. and Morgan, N. (1998). Overseas Military Bases and Environment . Institute

for Policy Studies. Washington, DC: Foreign Policy in Focus.


29/30


30/30


Environment). Washington DC: Acquisition, Technology and Logistics. Retrieved from:

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/471519p.pdf

United States Department of the Army, Technical Bulletin. (2006) Guidelines for Field Waste

Management (MED 593). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from:

http://armypubs.army.mil/med/dr_pubs/dr_a/pdf/tbmed593.pdf

United States Government Accountability Office. (2010). Afghanistan and Iraq: DOD Should

Improve Adherence to Its Guidance on Open Pit Burning and Solid Waste Management

(GAO-11-63). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-

11-63

Waleij, A. & Liljedahl, B. (2009). The Military as Environmental Steward in Peace Operations.

The Pearson Papers, Vol 12 , p. 61-74.

Whitfield, N. & Strong, B. (1960). War [Recorded by Edwin Starr]. On War and Peace [LP].

Detroit, MI: Motown Records. (1970).
http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/471519p.pdfhttp://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/471519p.pdfhttp://armypubs.army.mil/med/dr_pubs/dr_a/pdf/tbmed593.pdfhttp://armypubs.army.mil/med/dr_pubs/dr_a/pdf/tbmed593.pdfhttp://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-63http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-63http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-63http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-63http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-63http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-63http://armypubs.army.mil/med/dr_pubs/dr_a/pdf/tbmed593.pdfhttp://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/471519p.pdf

battle ready environmental warriors: challenges, combat and catalyst for change brew c4

Documents