• the Army has refused to take responsibility for or clean up the millions of pounds of depleted uranium (DU) it has spread around battle zones in Iraq and elsewhere, despite the documented damage that DU dust from armor-piercing rounds has caused to civilian populations in battle zones
• the Navy continues to use mid-frequency sonar and fight for deployment of low-frequency active sonar despite overwhelming evidence that these systems indiscriminately kill and injure whales, dolphins, and other marine life across thousands of square miles of ocean (and without any conceivable example that current enemies have or might use submarines against U.S. interests)
• the military overall is responsible for the generation of over one third of toxic waste generated in the U.S., and military sites transferred to civilian ownership are routinely left in a contaminated condition. This leads to public health crises and/or extended litigation, as at San Francisco's Hunters Point shipyard, Alameda Naval Air Station in California, and Clark Air Force Base and Subic Bay Naval Facility in the Philippines.

While I salute green building and actively use the LEED system (and ED+C magazine) in my day-to-day work, for a property owner to undertake a couple of high-profile green building projects while showing an overall disregard for the environment in overall operations is shallow greenwashing. The Defense Department is no exception, and should not get a free pass on its destructive activities ranging from environmental pollution to wars of aggression. U.S. militarism overall threatens the environment and the security of American citizens and people around the world despite the constant claims to the contrary.

Sincerely yours,
Raphael Sperry, AIA, LEED AP
Board member, Architects / Designers / Planners for Social Responsibility