ALBANY
The Business Council today called on the legislature to adopt needed reforms
to the states Superfund program as part of any refinancing effort.
These reformswhich are being adopted by an increasing number of stateswould
base cleanups on actual risks at a site, provide post-cleanup liability releases,
and reduce or eliminate liability for entities that did not cause contamination.
This comprehensive package should also include specific provisions, timetables
and incentives for brownfield redevelopment projects, said Ken
Pokalsky, director of environmental and regulatory affairs for The Business
Council.
These reforms will also make the states program more efficient, regardless
of whether private or public dollars are being spent at a site, he said. There
is a growing consensus that industrial-site cleanups should not be based on
the assumption that people will be living there for 30 years, and that groundwater
doesnt need to be cleaned to drinking-water standards if its use as
a potable water supply is unlikely or infeasible. And such unreasonable cleanup
requirements make projects more expensive for the state and private parties,
and make it less likely that responsible parties will come forward to do projects
in the absence of state enforcement efforts, Pokalsky said.
Reforms would bring even more private dollars into the states cleanup
efforts, and result in more sites being cleaned upand redevelopedmore
quickly, while making sure that all cleanups are protective of public health
and the environment. They would also reduce the states dependency on
public dollars for site cleanup projects, making Superfund refinancing less
burdensome on state taxpayers.
The Business Council does not think we should let the states Superfund
program run out of money, which would affect funding for cleanup projects
and DEC staff salariesalthough it is not clear that this is likely in
this fiscal year, Pokalsky said. Imminent bankruptcy has been
predicted for the Superfund since at least 1995, and it has not happened yet.
He noted that the Executive Budget said that the fund would remain solvent
at least through next year.
On the other hand, we should not devote hundreds of millions of additional
dollars, and add hundreds of additional sites, to the Superfund program without
making its cleanup procedures more efficient and its liability provisions
more fair, he said.
The Council strongly opposes any refinancing proposal that would impose significant
new taxes and fees on the states business community, Pokalsky said.
The states business community already pays more than its fair share
to clean state Superfund sites, he said. Responsible partiesmostly businesseshave
already spent or committed to spend more than $2.5 billion cleaning up sites
for which they are legally liable, he noted. The figure goes up by hundreds
of millions more if oil-spill sites are included.
In addition, businesses have paid more than $300 million in hazardous waste
generator fees, hazardous waste facility permit fees and special assessments
on the treatment and disposal of hazardous wastes that help pay off the 1986
Environmental Quality Bond Act (EQBA), he said. EQBA, the source of Superfund
monies, provided the state with $1.1 billion in borrowing authority to cleanup
hazardous waste sites and municipal landfills.
Pokalsky also noted that businesses are paying the price to avoid creating
future contamination. Businesses have spent hundreds of millions of
dollars to upgrade chemical and oil storage facilities to prevent releases
into the environment, and to identify and respond more quickly to spills that
do occur, he said. They pay the high cost of managing hazardous
wastes in compliance with federal and state lawsand face substantial
penalties for not doing so.
In addition, large quantity generators are required under both federal
and state law to develop and implement hazardous waste reduction plans.
Pokalsky noted that The New York State Superfund Management Board, an advisory
body comprised of both business and environmental advocates, recommends that
the state continue to finance state Superfund at an $80 million per year level.
To accomplish this, The Business Council believes that lawmakers should dedicate
$80 million per year from existing General-Fund revenues to the states
remediation fund. This represents about two-tenths of one percent of the states
general fund spending, and is far less than is diverted from the General Fund
each year to support the Environmental Protection Fund
a mechanism to fund land purchases, local recycling efforts, parks projects
and other environmental improvements.
This permanent funding source would give the same degree of certainty to the
Superfund program as did the 1986 EQBA, Pokalsky said. As with EQBA funds,
the state legislature would have to authorize spending of these funds on an
annual basis, he added.
If a comprehensive Superfund package including a General Fund-based
financing program cannot be negotiated this session, The Business Council
recommends that the legislature consider interim financing to address any
actual Superfund shortfall that might exist, Pokalsky said. The Governor
and both houses of the legislature have recognized the need to make New York
States economyespecially its upstate economymore competitive,
he said. The last thing we need is significant new taxes or fees imposed
on the states manufacturing community, or to continue a program that
is neither as efficient or effective as it could be.
-30-
April 28, 2000