For more than twenty years, the "polluter pays" principle has been a
cornerstone of environmental policy. The Superfund program, which
is based on that principle, made it possible to clean up hundreds of
the worst toxic waste dumps across the country, and cause industry
to better manage its pollution and waste.
The "polluter pays" principle is now under attack. Earlier this year,
the Bush Administration announced that it would not seek
reauthorization of the taxes levied on oil and chemical companies
that go into the Superfund trust fund which is used to pay for
cleanups of toxic waste sites. On October 25, 2002, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Inspector General found
that the Bush Administration has failed to provide adequate funding
to clean up 55 toxic waste sites in 25 states.
Polluters Should Pay
The Superfund program established three ways to pay for the cost of
cleanups: 1) the company or individual responsible for creating the
site pays for the cleanups of the site; 2) the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) performs the cleanups and recoups the costs from the
responsible party or parties; and 3) for those "orphan" sites where no
responsible party can be found, or the party is insolvent or no longer
in business, the clean up is paid for out of the trust fund.
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) imposed a tax on the oil and
chemical industries to finance the Superfund trust fund. In return,
these industries were relieved of most of their liability for petroleum
contamination. While the oil and chemical industry are covered by
other environmental laws, such as the Clean Air Act, they are the
only industries to receive special treatment under the Superfund law.
Bush Administration Shifts Cost from Industry to Taxpayers
The Superfund trust fund was created primarily with revenue from a corporate
environmental income tax and excise taxes on petroleum and certain chemicals - the
trust fund received about $1.5 billion per year before the legislative authority to collect
the taxes expired at the end of 1995. The trust fund is expected to run out of money in
2004 - having dwindled from a high of $3.8 billion in 1996 to $28 million this year.
Unfortunately, the Bush Administration and congressional Republicans have sided with
industry in opposing reinstatement of the Superfund tax.
Bush EPA Cuts Funding for Cleanups
There are 1,234 sites on the EPA national priority list of toxic waste sites that need to
be cleaned up. One in four Americans live within four miles of a Superfund site. These
sites contain hazardous pollutants like arsenic, cyanide, and agent orange. Last year,
EPA Administrator Christine Whitman told Congress that 75 sites on the national priority
list would be cleaned up in 2001 and 65 sites would be cleaned up in 2002. The Bush
Administration then revised their plan, requiring that only 47 site cleanups be completed
in 2001 and 42 in 2002 - a 64 percent reduction over two years. For 2003, the Bush
Administration has proposed to further decrease cleanups.
Cleanup Sites Denied Funding
On June 30, 2002, the EPA Inspector General issued a report that found the Bush
Administration cut funds this year at 33 Superfund sites in 18 states that regional offices
had requested.
In the latest report, dated October 25, 2002, the EPA Inspector General found that the
Bush Administration has cut funding at 55 Superfund sites in 25 states (shown in map
below) that regional officials had requested. For Fiscal Year 2002, EPA regional
officials requested $510 million to clean up waste sites. In response, EPA headquarters
only obligated $280 million, resulting in a shortfall of $229 million, or 45 percent.
The program is insufficiently funded to allow sites that are already scheduled to be
cleaned up to move forward. This results in increased risks to human health and the
environment and increased cleanup costs in the long term. Reinstating the Superfund
fee could restore a source of funding to the program at a time when the backlog of sites
requires more resources if the program is to be successful. The Bush Administration is
the first Administration since Superfund was enacted in 1980 to oppose reinstating the
tax on polluters.
Conclusion
The Bush plan to cut the Superfund program would seriously compromise the health of
our communities and amount to an enormous windfall for the oil and chemical
industries. Funding is the key to cleaning up these sites and protecting communities
from harm. The "polluter pays" principle has worked well over the last two decades and
the financial burden should not be shifted from polluters to average taxpayers. The
Administration should change course and find ways to restore the "polluter pays"
principle to the program and aggressively fund cleanups at contaminated sites.
