Almost a third of the 157 federal facilities designated as superfund sites in the Priority List of the National Environmental Protection Agency of the United States may be at risk of increasing sea levels or the increase in storms, according to a new report by the Office of the General Inspector of the EPA.
In addition, many of these places, all military installations, are near population centers and important ecological areas. About three million people live in a mile from a superfund federal site, and about 13 million are three kilometers, according to the report.
Superfund sites can be federal, owned or operated on the federal government, or non -federal installation sites. The EPA oversees the cleaning of sites in the federal facilities.
Oceanic and atmospheric national administration classifies sea level increase as a global concern, with the rise of increasing sea level: increasing from an annualized rate of 0.06 inches over most of the last century, to 0.14 inches from 2006 to 2015, according to EPA’s OIG. Sea levels throughout the United States will increase from 10 to 12 inches by 2050, increasing floods and storm tests, said OIG.
Critical deterioration
The cleaning remedies that have already been implemented in the federal facilities are susceptible to such extreme weather events, which could also “critically affect” ongoing cleaning efforts, said OIG in the report.
“If the cleaning remedies fail or are affected in a different way, this can lead to the spread of pollutants and increasing the risk of human and environmental exposure of these pollutants,” said the agency. This could affect the health, jobs and around millions of North citizens -Americans and waste the federal dollars they already spend to implement the remedies, he added.
First Street research, a non -profit climate risk data, shows that 2,702 sites are classified into superfund or dangerous waste, Jeremy Porter, head of climatic implications, told Enr an email. Of these, 207 (or about 7.7%) show a risk of moderate or higher flood, said Porter, who warned that his data did not separate the superfund sites from large groups of dangerous waste places.
MAPED OIG site locations use data from Noaa and National Weather Service Modeling. The mapping identified 49 of the 157 places in the federal facilities that are at risk. The report highlights three regions: Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound and San Francisco Bay, of which they have various federal installation sites. These three regions combined a total of 26 of the 49 superfund sites of the federal facilities.
The Inspector General of the EPA did not offer any recommendation in its report, but said that it is up to the EPA executives to make final decisions on how to move forward. The EPA did not provide a formal response to a draft of the report, but staff provided technical comments, which were incorporated into the report.
A spokesman for the OIG told ENR in an email that the EPA is not obliged to provide a response when no recommendations are made. Since this report does not contain recommendations, “the agency is not obliged to respond -we have not received a response,” said the spokesman.
Financing proposed by EPA
The OIG report comes in the middle of Trump Administration calls to reduce jobs and reduce EPA budget next year to $ 4.2 billion, less than half of its current $ 9.1 billion. The movement would include cuts to the Agency Superfund program. In addition to the annual funding of appropriations, however, the EPA is expected to receive $ 1.6 billion on superfund tax receipts in the year 2026, which is not reflected in the total budget, the administration said to the proposal. Said additional income will support the cleaning and application of superfund.
“ The EPA is fully transiting the Superfund Remedy Program for Superfund Taxes for Critical Pre-Construction projects, continuing ongoing construction projects and starting new remedy work on national priority charts to address pollutants including lead and polyphluoroalquil substances (PFAS), ” according to EPA. Superfund tax receipts will support the Superfund Federal Facility Program and Superfund’s Emergency Response and Emergency Removal Program.
