Committee on Energy and Commerce, Democrats Home Page
Who We Are Schedule What's New
View Printable Version

February 24, 2004

 


The Honorable Nikki L. Tinsley
Inspector General
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460-0001

Dear Inspector General Tinsley:

We appreciate the work that you have done in the past two years providing Congress with important reports concerning funding needs in FY 2002 and FY 2003 of non-federal Superfund National Priorities List (NPL) sites. Congress has a continuing need for information concerning the funding needs of non-federal Superfund sites to determine the level of appropriations necessary to expeditiously complete cleanup of these high-priority sites to remove public health and environmental hazards from our communities and return these sites to beneficial reuses. The Office of the Inspector General was provided $13.2 million from Superfund in FY 2004. We know of no higher priority that these resources can be put to than identifying the NPL sites that need additional funding to initiate and/or maximize cleanup activities.

Therefore, we again request that your office address the sufficiency of funding for non-federal sites at all stages of the site cleanup process, including a more detailed review of a limited number of sites to determine if cleanup actions are being stretched out over a greater number of years because of inadequate funding. We found the format of your January 7, 2004, report to be very informative and request that your evaluation and report cover the same scope of activities. We would also request that your evaluation and report include the following information:

1. Similar to the January 7, 2004, report, please provide a chart showing the amount of funding requested by each Region for each site in FY 2003 for cleanup activities for remedial investigation/feasibility studies, remedy selection, remedial design, remedial action construction, and long-term response actions at each site. Please include the amount the Headquarters has obligated, deobligated, and expended at each site and identify the sites that received inadequate or no funding.

2. Please describe internal agency efforts to shift funding from pipeline operations or other program activities into remedial funding, and attach relevant supporting documents.

3. The FY 2004 budget for EPA requested an extra $150 million for remedial action projects in FY 2004 to initiate cleanups at 10 to 15 new sites in FY 2004. Unfortunately, the FY 2004 Omnibus Appropriations Act which President Bush signed into law on January 23, 2004 (P.L. 108-199), actually cut the Superfund budget by $7 million from FY 2003 and was $132.5 million less than the President's FY 2004 budget request. Please identify the "10 to 15 sites" that were to receive funding to initiate cleanups in FY 2004, the amount of funding that they needed, and the funding actually received in FY 2004.

We would request your evaluation and report no later than July 15, 2004. Thank you for your cooperation in addressing this most important issue for the Superfund program.

Sincerely,

 

JOHN D. DINGELL
RANKING MEMBER
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY
AND COMMERCE

HILDA L. SOLIS
RANKING MEMBER
HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT
AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

JAMES M. JEFFORDS
 RANKING MEMBER
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT
AND PUBLIC WORKS

BARBARA BOXER
RANKING MEMBER
SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SUPERFUND
WASTE MANAGEMENT

 

 

Prepared by the Committee on Energy and Commerce
2125 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515