What's In Your Neighborhood
School, Parks, Home
Information Sources For Your Health and Well-Being
In Progress
Toxins
What is the "Superfund" Program?
Search for Superfund Sites Where You Live
Superfund cleanups have decreased to a mere 8
in 2014,
out of over 1,200 = less than 7/10’s of 1%
= 0.00666%
What is the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)?
What other sites map TRI data?
Wikipedia - Toxins
Water
Summary
of the Clean Water Act
Clean Water Act
Ground Water
and Drinking Water
Wikipedia - Water
USGS Groundwater Information Pages
Quality of Water from Domestic Wells in the United States
Water-related Diseases and Contaminants in Public Water Systems
Overview of Water-related Diseases and Contaminants in Private Wells
Air
Air Quality Index (AQI) Basics
The Plain English Guide to the Clean Air Act
EPA SUPER FUND: Love canal relationship needed here dating helps LC was responsible for the establishment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfund
SUPER FUND - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA)
Approximately 70% of Superfund cleanup activities historically have been paid
for by parties responsible (PRPs) for the cleanup of contamination. The exceptions
occur when the responsible party either cannot be found or is unable to pay
for the cleanup. Until the mid-1990s, most of the funding came from a tax on
the petroleum and chemical industries, reflecting the polluter pays principle,
but since 2001, most of the funding for cleanups of hazardous waste sites has
come from taxpayers. Despite the name, the program has suffered from under-funding,
and Superfund cleanups have decreased to a mere 8 in 2014, out of over 1,200.
= less than 7/10’s of 1%, .00666
Hazard Ranking System (HRS) 0-100/ 28.5 places site on
National Priorities List, eligible for long-term remedial action (i.e., cleanup)
under the Superfund program. As of 9 August 2016, there were 1,328 sites listed;
an additional 391 had been delisted, and 55 new sites have been proposed.
CERCLA was enacted by Congress in 1980 in response to the threat of hazardous waste sites, typified by the Love Canal disaster in New York, and the Valley of the Drums in Kentucky.[2] The initial trust fund to clean up a site where a polluter could not be identified, could not or would not pay (bankruptcy or refusal) consisted of about $1.6 billion.[3]
The EPA published the first Hazard Ranking System (HRS) in 1981, and the first
National Priorities List (NPL) in 1983.[4] Implementation during early years,
the two terms of the Reagan administration was ineffective, as only 16 of the
799 Superfund sites were cleaned up, and only $40 million of $700 million in
recoverable funds from responsible parties were collected. Reagan's policies
were described as laissez-faire.[5]:5
The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) added minimum
cleanup requirements in Section 121, and required that most cleanup agreements
with polluters be entered in federal court as a consent decree subject to public
comment (section 122). [6] This was to address sweetheart deals between industry
and the Reagan-era EPA, that Congress had discovered.[citation needed]
In 1994, President Bill Clinton proposed a new Superfund reform bill, Executive
Order (E.O) 12898, which called for federal agencies to make achieving environmental
justice a requirement by addressing low income populations and minority populations
that have experienced disproportionate adverse health and environmental effects
as a result of their programs, policies, and activities.[7]
^ Konisky, David M. (2015). Failed Promises: The Federal Government's Response
to Environmental Inequality. MIT Press. pp. 29, 56. doi:10.7551/mitpress/9780262028837.001.0001.
ISBN 9780262028837.
The regional office of the Environmental Protection Agency now had to apply
required guidelines for its managers to take into consideration data analysis,
managed public participation, and economic opportunity when considering the
geography of toxic waste site remediation.[8] Some environmentalists and industry
lobbyists saw the Clinton administration’s environmental justice policy
as an improvement, but the bill did not get bipartisan support. The newly elected
Republican Congress made numerous unsuccessful efforts to significantly weaken
the law. The Clinton Administration then adopted some industry favored reforms
as policy and blocked most major changes.[9]
Until the mid-1990s, most of the funding came from a tax on the petroleum and
chemical industries, reflecting the polluter pays principle.[10] Even though
by 1995 nearly $4 billion in fees were in the superfund, Congress did not reauthorize
to collect these and by 2003 the superfund was empty.[11]:1
According to a 2015 U.S. Government Accountability Office report, since 2001,
most of the funding for cleanups of hazardous waste sites has come from taxpayers;
a state pays 10 percent of cleanup costs in general and at least 50 percent
of it operated the facility responsible for contamination. By 2013 funding had
decreased from $2 billion in 1999 to less than $1.1 billion (in constant dollars).[10]:11
From 2000-2015, Congress allocated about $1.26 billion of general revenue to
the Superfund program each year. Consequently, less than half the number of
sites were cleaned up from 2001 to 2008, compared to before. The decrease continued
during the Obama Administration, and since under the direction of EPA Administrator
Gina McCarthy Superfund cleanups decreased even more from 20 in 2009 to a mere
8 in 2014.[3]:8
The preliminary 2018 Trump Administration Superfund budget would cut the program
by $330 million out of its nearly $1.1 billion budget, a 30% reduction to the
Environmental Protection Agency program.[12]
CERCLA authorizes two kinds of response actions:
1. Removal actions. These are typically short-term response actions, where actions
may be taken to address releases or threatened releases requiring prompt response.
Removal actions are classified as: (1) emergency; (2) time-critical; and (3)
non-time critical. Removal responses are generally used to address localized
risks such as abandoned drums containing hazardous substances, and contaminated
surface soils posing acute risks to human health or the environment.[13]
2. Remedial actions. These are usually long-term response actions. Remedial
actions seek to permanently and significantly reduce the risks associated with
releases or threats of releases of hazardous substances, and are generally larger
more expensive actions. They can include measures such as using containment
to prevent pollutants from migrating, and combinations of removing, treating,
or neutralizing toxic substances. These actions can be conducted with federal
funding only at sites listed on the EPA National Priorities List (NPL) in the
United States and the territories. Remedial action by responsible parties under
consent decrees or unilateral administrative orders with EPA oversight may be
performed at both NPL and non-NPL sites, commonly called Superfund Alternative
Sites in published EPA guidance and policy documents.[14]
Despite the name, the Superfund trust fund lacks sufficient funds to clean up even a small number of the sites on the NPL. As a result, the EPA typically negotiates consent orders with PRPs to study sites and develop cleanup alternatives, subject to EPA oversight and approval of all such activities. The EPA then issues a Proposed Plans for remedial action for a site on which it takes public comment, after which it makes a cleanup decision in a Record of Decision (ROD). RODs are typically implemented under consent decrees by PRPs or under unilateral orders if consent cannot be reached.[20] If a party fails to comply with such an order, it may be fined up to $37,500 for each day that non-compliance continues.
Implementation:
As of 9 August 2016, there were 1,328 sites listed on the National Priority
List; an additional 391 had been delisted, and 55 new sites were proposed.[28]
Historically about 70 percent of Superfund cleanup activities have been paid
for by potentially responsible party (PRPs). when the party either cannot be
found or is unable to pay for the cleanup, the Superfund law originally paid
for toxic waste cleanups through a tax on petroleum and chemical industries.
The chemical and petroleum fees were intended to provide incentives to use less
toxic substances.[citation needed] Over five years, $1.6 billion was collected,
and the tax went to a trust fund for cleaning up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous
waste sites.[citation needed]
The last full fiscal year (FY) in which the Department of the Treasury collected
the tax was 1995.[11]:1 At the end of FY 1996, the invested trust fund balance
was $6.0 billion. This fund was exhausted by the end of FY 2003;[11]:3 Since
that time superfund sites for which the potentially responsible parties could
not pay, have been paid for from the general fund appropriated by Congress.[11]:1
TOXMAP is a Geographic Information System (GIS) from the Division of Specialized Information Services[41] of the United States National Library of Medicine (NLM) that uses maps of the United States to help users visually explore data from the EPA Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and Superfund programs. TOXMAP is a resource funded by the US Federal Government. TOXMAP's chemical and environmental health information is taken from NLM's Toxicology Data Network (TOXNET),[42] PubMed, and other authoritative sources.
https://toxmap-classic.nlm.nih.gov/toxmap/combo/select.do
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry National Priorities List (NPL), which
lists all chemical contaminants present at these sites.
There are two versions of TOXMAP available from its home page: the classic version
of TOXMAP released in 2004 and, a newer version released in 2014 that is based
on Adobe Flash/Apache Flex technology. In addition to many of the features of
TOXMAP classic, the new version provides an improved map appearance and interactive
capabilities as well as a more current GIS look-and-feel. This includes seamless
panning, immediate update of search results when zooming to a location, two
collapsible side panels to maximize map size, and automatic size adjustment
after a window resize. The new TOXMAP also has improved U.S. Census layers and
availability by Census Tract (2000 and 2010), Canadian National Pollutant Release
Inventory (NPRI) data, U.S. commercial nuclear power plants, as well as improved
and updated congressional district boundaries.
TOXMAP classic users may search the system by location (such as city, state,
or ZIP code), chemical name, chemical name fragment, release medium, release
amount, facility name and ID, and can filter results to those residing within
a pre-defined or custom geographic region.
Search results may be brought up in Google Maps or Google Earth, or saved for
use in other tools. TOXMAP also overlays map data such as U.S. Census population
information, income figures from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, and health
data from the National Cancer Institute and the National Center for Health Statistics.[4]
Main article: List of Superfund sites in the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Superfund_sites
Map [filed under images] of Superfund sites as of October 2013. Red indicates
currently on final National Priority List, yellow is proposed, green is deleted
(usually meaning having been cleaned up).
This is a list of Superfund sites in the United States, designated under the
Comprehensive Environmental
Superfund sites have been shown to impact minority communities the most.[31]
Crawford, Collin (1994). "Strategies for Environmental Justice: Rethinking
CERCLA Medical Monitoring Lawsuits". Faculty Publications at Reading Room.
74 B.U. L. Rev. 267.
Despite legislation specifically designed to ensure equity in Superfund listing,
marginalized populations still experience a lesser chance of successful listing
and cleanup than areas with higher income levels.[32]
O’Neil, Sandra George (5 April 2007). "Superfund: Evaluating the
Impact of Executive Order 12898". Environmental Health Perspectives. 115
(7): 1087–1093. doi:10.1289/ehp.9903. ISSN 0091-6765. PMC 1913562? . PMID
17637927