|
The Business Council has
urged the state Legislature to enact broad reforms to the state's Superfund
program, including dedicated General-Fund financing, use-based cleanup standards,
and liability relief for parties that complete state-approved site cleanups.
Ken Pokalsky, director of
environmental and regulatory affairs, testified Wednesday before a legislative
hearing on environmental issues in the Executive Budget.
The Council's recommendations
for Superfund refinancing and reform include:
General-fund financing:
Pokalsky noted
that responsible parties, most of which are businesses, already pay more
than 90 percent of the costs of cleaning industrial contamination, considering
both responsible parties' cleanup costs and various industry fees. The other
10 percent comes from the state Superfund and is spent on abandoned properties.
To refinance
Superfund, The Council supports a permanent approach using a dedicated
stream of funds that would come entirely from the state's General Fund.
These funds would be used to clean abandoned sites for which a responsible
party cannot be found or identified. Parties that actually cause pollution
would remain financially responsible for cleaning any contamination
they create; other cleanups would be financed by all taxpayers, including
business, through taxes paid into the General Fund, Pokalsky said.
The Council opposes proposals
to create new taxes or fees on business to fund Superfund, he added. Some
advocates have proposed new business taxes or fees. This so-called
"polluter pays" notion is really just a "tax business"
approach, because businesses would pay regardless of whether they were responsible
for toxic pollution. This would unfairly penalize all businesses for contamination,
Pokalsky said.
Use-based cleanup standards:
New cleanup standards for soil, and a new process for dealing with groundwater,
should both reflect the intended use of the site being cleaned, Pokalsky
said.
"This approach provides
high levels of protection for residential property and drinking water supplies,
and requires that cleanup standards reflect potential impact on 'sensitive
populations,' including children," Pokalsky said.
Liability relief:
"Innocent" land
owners and parties that complete DEC-approved cleanups should receive broad
relief from future liability associated with cleanup issues, with limited
opportunities to reopen these cases, Pokalsky said.
"Parties that are willing
to cleanup and redevelop a contaminated property should be released from
future liability for contamination they did not cause," Pokalsky testified.
Incentives: Pokalsky
urged creation of targeted economic incentives to encourage nonresponsible
parties to remediate and redevelopment contaminated property.
Expanded Superfund program:
Pokalsky said The Council supports expanding the scope of the state's existing
Superfund program to include "hazardous substance sites" that pose a significant
threat to the environment, as part of a comprehensive reform and refinancing
bill.
Advantages of this approach:
The Council's approach would offer a number of benefits, Pokalsky said:
- It would clean more
sites, more quickly.
- It would make sites
safe for the general public and site users, and ensure that they are
protective of environmental resources.
- It would use more private
dollars, and less tax dollars.
- It would help return
contaminated sites into beneficial use.
The
Governor's proposal: Governor
Pataki's proposal contains a number of provisions that The Business Council
supports, Pokalsky testified. These include the proposal's approach to soil
cleanups and its provisions for liability reform for "innocent landowners."
However, he added, reforms
enacted should be even broader.
For example, he noted that
the Executive Budget proposal makes no provisions on groundwater remediation,
provides only a limited liability release for non-responsible parties conducting
voluntary cleanups, imposes significant new fees on manufacturers, and creates
"onerous - and unnecessary - new enforcement provisions."
|