Name:   MartiniMan - Subject:   Martini Date:   1/13/2014 8:45:24 AM

GF, CERCLA (aka Superfund) is one of the most dysfunctional pieces of legislation for a couple of reasons.  First, its liability scheme (joint and several liability) has done more to slow down cleanups than anything imaginable.  Joint and several means if you put in one ounce of hazardous substances into say a landfill you are liable for 100% of the costs as are all the other potentially responsible parties (PRPs).  What this guarantees is years of litigation between the goverment and PRPs and between PRPs, all of which has cost billions of dollars and wasted tens of years.  Second, the regulations that EPA created as a result of Superfund are complex and costly to comply with and significantly delay any cleanup activities, not to mention requiring EPA approval of every step of the way where the agency person is usually the least experienced and knowledgable person involved in the process.  I am working on Superfund sites that have been on the National Priorities List (NPL) since the 1980s where very little cleanup has occurred because of the process.  Thirdly, any time EPA is in charge of a cleanup (i.e., where there is no viable PRP to pay and implement the process) it takes twice as long and costs three times as much.  Just one minor example, when we go out to sample a well we do so with one person who is usually staff level or a technician.  On a fund lead project they have the technician, the geologist and the chemist.  Finally, the risk assessment process used in Superfund results in an incredible waste of money for very little benefit to human health and the environment.  Typical cleanups are done to a cancer risk level of one in one million and is based on exposure factors that are beyond ludicrous and have no basis in reality.  And just so you understand one in a million, it means that assuming a receptor (human) is exposed to the level of contamination over a period of 30 years it incrementally increases their risk of cancer by one in a million.  If you smoke your excess cancer risk is about one in five.

So Superfund as conceived in the legislation and as implemented by EPA has been an abysmal waste of resources.  Having said that, I am all for the polluter paying even if the release was not intentional and was simply a result of how wastes were managed in the day. The primary reason is that if the corporations that caused the contamination pay for and control the cleanup process it will be much more efficient and ultimatley cost the country less money for the same or better results.  I can't comment on the specific legislation because I have not read it but I can tell you that anything they do to reign in EPA will ultimately benefit the country.  The spill in West Virginia was an accident that sometimes happens and has to be addressed.  This legislation (as I understand it from your post) would have no influence on how that spill is cleaned up.  EPA is an out of control agency that has lost its way because it is being run by attorney's with political goals and objectives, not protection of human health and the environment.  Obvioulsy I could go on for pages about the topic and keep in mind, my company relies on EPA and state agencies and these rules and regulations for our business.  And there are a lot of very good people working at these agencies that are not environmental wackos but are simply trying to implement rules and regulations written by a bunch of corrupt lawyers.