Corporations pitch in to pay for cleanups

It was not always this way for Superfund, which Congress created during President Carter's administration to clean up hazardous waste sites nobody else would. By 1995, Superfund had a $3.6 billion surplus - the same year Congress refused to continue taxing polluting industries.

Because of that action, Superfund ran dry in 2002, with taxpayers now forced to contribute more than a billion dollars annually to fill the gap - about $1.2 billion in 2005 alone.

By comparison, taxpayers forked over just $300 million to clean up waste sites in 1995, about 18 percent of the Superfund, according to a tally by Ms. Gibbs's group.

Despite having more than $1 billion in taxpayer funds, Superfund has had a one-third decline in overall funding over the past 12 years and persistent shortfalls in funding, including about $175 million in 2003, the General Accounting Office (GAO) reported in June.

Such shortfalls resulted in a declining number of Superfund sites cleaned up each year, critics say. In the late 1990s, an average of 87 cleanups were completed each year, compared with about 40 per year since 2002, the EPA reported.

Just 16 sites were announced as completely cleaned up, according to an EPA tally in mid-September, but the final total is expected to be about the same as in 2004, an EPA spokesman says.

Noting the slowdown, some congressional lawmakers including Sens. Barbara Boxer (D) of California and Frank Lautenberg (D) of New Jersey have proposed returning to polluter funding, but several votes taken in the last few years have failed.

Ms. Gibbs blames the White House for opposing the "polluter pays principle" and instead "giving polluters a tax holiday" at taxpayers' expense.

EPA officials, however, blame fewer completed cleanups and the slowdown in new project starts on greater technical hurdles and rising costs of cleanups.

"Funding from Congress has remained relatively steady and with that set funding EPA has cleaned up a substantial number of the less costly and complex sites, while continuing to address the cleanup needs of the more complicated sites," says Eryn Witcher, EPA press secretary.

Top EPA officials also say the Superfund system is working well.

"This is an historic agreement that commits GE to begin dredging the Hudson River," said EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson earlier this month in a statement. "This is an important milestone in this complex environmental project."

But even this landmark deal could have a major downside, if GE refuses to fund a later phase of the project. In that case, the cost could shift to the US taxpayer.

"The EPA is just adding to the problem by reaching partial settlements that really let responsible parties off the hook," says Alex Fidis, an attorney at the US Public Interest Research Group, an environmental group in Washington, D.C. "This would be less likely to happen if the EPA could say, 'Fine, we have the funds to do the clean up - and send you the bill.'"

Page: 1 | 2