As the 25th anniversary took place for America’s cornerstone program to clean up toxic dumpsites, the Superfund Program, a new PennEnvironment study showed that the program’s future is in jeopardy by funding shortfalls that will hinder Superfund’s ability to respond to toxic clean up in Pennsylvania and nationwide.

This is particularly problematic in Pennsylvania, which is currently home to the second highest number of Superfund sites in the nation with 94 such sites, only behind New Jersey with 113 Superfund sites.

Yet instead of optimism, the 25th anniversary of Superfund was met by the environmental and public health community with apprehension and concern. Since 2002, Superfund has endured annual funding deficits, with overall deficits exceeding $600 million.

Pennsylvania is already feeling the effects of an under-funded Superfund program, the PennEnvironment report showed. A number of sites in the state did not receive new funding in 2004 or will not receive new funding in 2005 due to the program’s ongoing budget cuts. This includes sites in Philadelphia, Montgomery, Delaware and Berks counties. PennEnvironment’s study concluded that Superfund’s traditional funding source—through polluter fees—must be reinstated to ensure sufficient funding to clean up toxic waste sites in Pennsylvania and nationwide.

Reports

A new study by PennEnvironment entitled “Plagued by Pollution,” showed that Pennsylvania ranked 2nd worst in the nation for levels of soot pollution in 2004, while Pittsburgh had more dangerous spikes in soot pollution than any other large city in the country. Soot pollution can cause severe health problems ranging from asthma and breathing difficulties, to heart attacks and lung cancer. The report also showed that four more Pennsylvania cities—Harrisburg, Lancaster, York and Reading— ranked among the ten worst mid-sized cities for soot pollution levels.

PennEnvironment’s study was covered by news outlets across the state. PennEnvironment is calling on the Bush administration to strengthen air quality standards for soot pollution. The administration has proposed soot standards that are far too weak to protect public health—against the advice of their own scientists.

MEMBER ACTION:
Sign up for e-mail issue alerts: