Drop in Budget Slows Superfund Program

[UpInArms]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/09/politics/09ENVI.html

WASHINGTON, March 8 — The Bush administration, citing budgetary concerns, has proposed new Superfund toxic waste sites at a much slower rate than previous administrations, a practice criticized by state environmental officials who say it masks the true demand for toxic cleanup in the country.

On Monday the Environmental Protection Agency proposed 11 sites to be cleaned up under the Superfund program, which lists more than 1,200 sites. The new sites include two in New York State: in Holley, near Rochester, and in Hewlett, on Long Island. The agency will solicit public comment before it formally adds the sites to the Superfund list, a process that could take longer than a year in some cases.

While the agency can propose additional sites this year, the Bush administration's pace of adding Superfund sites presents a stark contrast to that of the Clinton administration. In 2003 it nominated 14 sites to the Superfund program and 9 sites the previous year. The Clinton administration added 34 to 45 sites each year during its second term.

<snip>

E.P.A. officials acknowledge the slowdown in placing sites on the list. They say that a tight budget forces them to balance the cost of cleaning up a site against the risk to the public if nothing is done.

...more...

[KissMyAsscroft]

1. Gee its almost like the tax cut was a bad idea....

:eyes:

[alittlelark]

2. We live in the Silicon Valley

WE have the highest # of Superfund projects in the US (per capita) - meeeeeessssed up. We will be moving from this area w/in 2 years - I hope (for the kid's sake).


BUT< WE LIVE IN THE BEST PLACE IN THE WORLD TO HAVE KIDS>

YEAH, RIGHT.