|
Long before RCRA and the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act were passed to regulate the storage and disposal of
hazardous waste, manufacturing industries, the national defense industry, and the oil and gas industry were producing and disposing of hazardous wastes. Many of these waste disposal sites, as
well as production facilities, have closed down, been abandoned, or changed ownership several times, often without the new owners fully understanding what they have inherited. Not
surprisingly, these abandoned and near-abandoned waste sites have contaminated water and surface water and caused adverse human health effects. The Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) was passed by Congress in 1980 to provide funding to clean up these facilities and waste sites. As part of the act, a trust fund of $1.6 billion was
authorized over five years. Since then, Congress has twice re-authorized CERCLA, increasing funding from $1.6 billion to $13.6 billion.* These funds are to be used to help clean up abandoned and closed hazardous waste sites that are placed by the EPA on a national priority list if they meet certain conditions under a hazard ranking system.* About 70 percent -- more than $20.6 billion -- of total cleanup costs, however, have come from the responsible parties.*
However, since 1995, there have been significant concerns about funding at the National Superfund program, as
Congress has chosen not to reauthorize a variety of "polluter pays" fees on the purchase of chemicals and petroleum as well as a corporate environmental income tax on large chemical companies
to help fund the program. When the fees expired in 1995, there was still a surplus of $3.6 billion in the Superfund trust fund. However, by the end of 2004, by present rates of spending, the
fund will only support some 20 percent of the total amount earmarked for the program, with other funds supported by the general taxpayers picking up the rest. A recent EPA Inspector
General's report found that 78 Superfund sites that had requested funding in FY 2002 received either no or partial funding.*
Even with the slowdown in funding, the EPA's federal superfund program has cleaned up hundreds of highly
polluted sites around the country. As of December 2002,
there were 1,232 waste sites on the final Superfund list, with another 61 proposed for the list, and another 267 which had been on the list but have since been deleted because of clean-up activities being completed.* In addition to those on the list, the EPA, states and tribal partners have assessed more than 44,000 sites, with 75 percent of those having been removed from the Superfund inventory. Industrial solvents are present at 87 percent of Superfund sites; inorganic compounds, including lead, at 87 percent; and pesticides, at 50 percent.* All told, 1 in 4 people in the U.S. -- including 10 million children -- live within four miles of a Superfund toxic waste site.*
|
ACTIVE FEDERAL AND STATE SUPERFUND SITES BY COUNTY, SEPTEMBER 2003
|
|
|
|
For greater detail: Federal Sites orState Sites
|
|
Source: TCEQ, Texas State Superfund Registry, September 19, 2003
and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, NPL Sites in Texas, September 2003.
|
|
By September 2003, 43 sites in Texas were included on, and two were proposed for the
federal Superfund National Priority List. Seven other sites were previously on the National Priority List but have since been cleaned up or removed from the NPL.*
In addition to the Federal Superfund program, the Texas legislature amended the Solid Waste
Disposal Act in 1985 to create the State Superfund Program. If a site is not eligible for the national list and cannot be resolved through an agreed order with a responsible company, it
can be become part of the Texas State Superfund Registry. These sites are not considered dangerous enough to be placed on the National Priority List, but are still determined
to pose an "imminent and substantial endagerment" to Texans.
As of September 2003, 20 sites were listed as actively forming part of the "active" State
Superfund Registry, and another 26 sites have been proposed for the Superfund Registry, while 31 sites previously on or proposed on the Registry have since been taken off the list,
either due to further information or resolution of the pollution problems.* There are several
thousand other closed or abandoned sites in Texas that contain hazardous substances, about 600 of which must be
investigated to determine if they should be on either the state or federal Superfund lists.* Most of the abandoned
waste and production facility sites in Texas are related to the production of oil and gas or to the chemical industry.*
Unfortunately, the federal Superfund program has not resulted in the expected rapid restoration of abandoned dump
sites. Between 1980 and 1992, it took an average of two and one-half years for the first stages of the cleanup process to begin.* During this phase, the Superfund program attempts to locate responsible parties—those who actually
produced, transported, or disposed of hazardous waste in an unsafe manner—-and make them pay for remediation
and restoration. This often results in long legal battles. If the responsible parties are unable or unwilling to fund cleanup, or if they cannot be found, the federal government will pay.* However, in recent years, clean-up has occured
significantly faster. As of December 2002, 267 sites had been deleted from the NPL list due to clean-up, while another
583 -- together representing more than 56 percent -- of the 1,499 sites on the federal Superfund list had completed construction cleanup.* In Texas, 14 of the 43 active sites on the federal list have completed cleanup, while six others
formerly on the list have been officially deleted.*
Texas's state Superfund program also has been hit by delays, although clean-up has occured faster in recent years. By
the end of FY 2003, 31 sites had been deleted from the State Registry, either because of clean-up, an agreement with
the responsible party or because it was discovered that the sites did not require as much clean-up as initially believed.* The state Superfund program is funded through a fee on the sale of lead acid batteries and from a fee on
the on-site management of hazardous and industrial solid waste. These funds pay for cleanups under the state
Superfund program and also provide the state's 10 percent share of cleanup costs under the federal Superfund
program. Where a responsible party can be identified, the agency recovers the cost of state Superfund cleanups.* The
state estimates that it spent a total of $29 million from 1985 to 1998 to begin the cleanup process at those sites where a responsible party could not be held accountable.* For FY 2004 and 2005, the Texas Legislature earmarked $63
million for the hazardous materials clean-up program, which includes the state and federal superfund programs, as
well as other clean-up programs. Still, the funds represented a $6 million cut from what the agency had initially
requested to clean-up Superfund sites and will result in some delays in clean-up.*
In part because of the high costs and the time delays in identifying responsible parties, in 1995 the Texas legislature
amended the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act and created the Voluntary Cleanup Program. The program became
effective in September 1995. In 1996 the Houston Lead State Superfund Site, a former secondary smelting and metal
refining plant and lead-battery recycling facility, became the first Superfund site to enter this voluntary program.*
The voluntary cleanup program has focused on "brownfields," abandoned industrial or commercial sites in urban areas
that have remained undeveloped because of contamination and fear of liability. The Texas Voluntary Cleanup Program
operates in partnership with the EPA's Brownfields Initiative. In Texas, the EPA has awarded brownfield pilot grants to
the cities of Dallas, Houston, and Laredo and has provided funds to the TCEQ for the state's voluntary program. Under
the state program, a property owner carries out an environmental site assessment of the property and sends in an
application and a $1,000 application fee. Once the application is accepted, an agreement to clean up the site is
negotiated between the applicant and the TCEQ. Brownfields used for industrial sites do not need to be cleaned up to
the same level as those used for residential or commercial development. Once contaminant levels in all media meet the
health-based standards for the property's future land use, a release of liability is issued by the TCEQ for future lenders and landowners. Most contaminated sites are eligible for the program.*
Through June, 2002, the Voluntary Cleanup Program had received 1,270 applications.* Legislation passed in 1997 allows municipalities to enter into a tax-abatement agreement with the owner of property in the Voluntary Cleanup
Program. Under these agreements, a municipality can exempt from property tax a portion of the property's value for up
to four years if the property is located in a reinvestment zone. The measure was passed to offer another incentive for
the cleanup of industrial sites. However, opponents of the legislation claim the tax-abatement agreements will shift the burden of taxes to other taxpayers.*
|
