Bush to halt 33 toxic cleanups

[Guest guest]

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=51812 & category=FRONTP

G & newsdate=7/1/2002

Bush to halt 33 toxic cleanups

Multimillion-dollar shortage in Superfund forces a reduction in the number

of waste sites program can handle

By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE, New York Times

First published: Monday, July 1, 2002

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration has designated 33 toxic waste sites in

18 states for cuts in funding under the Superfund cleanup program, according

to a new report to Congress by the inspector general of the Environmental

Protection Agency.

The cuts, imposed because the cleanup fund is hundreds of millions of

dollars short of the amount needed to keep the program on schedule, mean

that work is likely to grind to a halt on some of the most seriously

polluted sites in the country, confronting the surrounding communities with

new uncertainty over when the work will resume, how quickly it will proceed

and who will pay for it.

Among the sites that for now would receive less money -- and in some cases,

no money -- are a manufacturing plant in Edison, N.J., where the herbicide

Agent Orange was produced, several chemical plants in Florida and two old

mines in Montana. The report to Congress is the first public listing by the

environmental agency of where it intends to cut Superfund spending. It was

provided to The New York Times by Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce

Committee who oppose the cuts.

The administration had already indicated it would scale back spending from

the special fund that pays for cleaning up sites where the original polluter

has gone out of business or is otherwise unable to pay for remediation. The

fund has been running out of money since Congress refused several years ago

to extend the taxes on industry that had replenished it each year. It once

contained billions of dollars from those taxes.

The administration wants to reduce the payments from the fund by covering

fewer sites. To do that it would shift the costs of further work to the

government's general accounts, paid for by all taxpayers. Congressional

critics have said this amounts to abandoning the precept that " the polluter

pays, " on which the Superfund program was founded.

While Congress theoretically could override the administration's plan and

impose a different approach, Congress has failed in past years to resolve

bitter, often partisan, differences among lawmakers on how to revamp the

program, and no consensus on it has emerged this year.

Regional offices of the environmental agency had asked for $450 million for

remedial action at the 33 sites, but the administration has allocated only

$228 million, the inspector general's report says.

Like all sites covered by the Superfund program, the 33 that are targeted

for reductions are among the most contaminated grounds in the country and

pose some level of health and environmental hazards. The documents provided

by the inspector general did not indicate how these sites were chosen for

cuts.

The report makes clear that under the administration's approach, the costs

of cleaning up these sites would eventually shift to all taxpayers and that

in the meantime the whole program would be slowed down.

It also shows that the administration is putting less money into continuing

54 long-term remediation projects around the country. Regional offices of

the Environmental Protection Agency had requested $46.7 million, but the

administration is giving them $33.2 million.

Two Democrats, Reps. D. Dingell of Michigan and Pallone Jr. of

New Jersey, asked the environmental agency's inspector general for the

report in April and provided a copy to The New York Times. Both represent

states with heavy concentrations of Superfund sites.

Businesses have long complained about the Superfund program. At one time,

chemical and oil companies, among others, were required to pay a special tax

that cost them collectively about $1 billion a year. The tax went into the

fund to clean up contaminated sites, but businesses said the system of

allocating the money was unwieldy and badly managed.

The report identifies five sites for spending reductions in New Jersey, five

in Florida, three in Texas, one in New York and one or two in several other

states as well as in the Virgin Islands. In New York, the report lists the

GCL Tie and Treating Inc. site in Sidney, Delaware County, for spending

cuts.

The fund was set up in 1980 with a special tax on chemical and oil companies

to clean up so-called orphan sites, or those where the polluter could not be

identified or would not pay, as well as for recalcitrant companies and

emergency action.

But the trust fund is running out of money. Congress let the corporate taxes

expire in 1995. Without them, the fund has dwindled from a high of $3.8

billion in 1996 to a projected $28 million next year. President Bush's

budget made clear that he did not intend to reauthorize the tax.