Contact:  Tim Tomastik             FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
          Jessica Wasserman        4/17/96

H.R. 2500 WILL HAMPER EFFORTS TO RESTORE NATURAL RESOURCES HARMED BY PCBs IN THE HUDSON RIVER

A congressional proposal to change the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (Superfund) would limit the liability of polluters for injury to waterways like the Hudson River, the Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said today.

The upper Hudson River has been proclaimed as one of America's 10 most endangered and threatened rivers of 1996 by American Rivers, North America's leading river conservation organization.

The proposed Reform of Superfund Act of 1995 (H.R. 2500) will leave harm resulting from the discharge of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) into the Hudson River unaddressed, and will have an adverse economic and cultural impact on New York state and local communities. The value of landings from commercial fisheries, closed because of PCBs found in the upper Hudson River, is estimated at $500,000 to over $1 million annually. The estimated value of recreational fisheries landings lost is over $3 million annually.

H.R. 2500 will remove the provisions that enable natural resource trustees to restore injured fishery resources in the Hudson and will allow these losses to continue.

"This legislation undermines the fundamental premise underlying CERCLAžs natural resource trustee provisions -- that polluters should pay to restore the natural resources that have been injured by the release of hazardous substances," said Terry Garcia, general counsel for NOAA. "If enacted, the legislation would neglect those natural resources in the Hudson River that have been injured by PCB contamination, and deprive all Americans of their natural resource heritage."

Thirty years of discharges of PCBs from two electrical capacitor manufacturing plants into the upper Hudson River has left 200 miles of the river's sediments contaminated. Contamination led to the closure of the commercial fishery for striped bass in 1976 for the entire length of the river; a possession ban for striped bass was instituted in 1986. Also since 1976, commercial sales of most other species have been limited to bait sales only and consumption advisories exist throughout the river and estuary for most species. Other impacts of H.R. 2500 on efforts to restore natural resources injured by PCBs in the Hudson River include:

  
  o  H.R. 2500 establishes a liability cap of $50 million for
all responsible parties, for all releases, from all facilities
within a group.  The contamination in the upper Hudson River is
the result of multiple releases and covers a vast area.  This
arbitrary cap could unnecessarily limit the ability of trustees
to restore injured natural resources. 

  
  o  H.R. 2500 provides that actions taken to address clean up
by non-trustees may prevent designated trustees from restoring
injured resources even if the remedial action fails to address
the harm.  For PCB contamination in the Hudson River, this could
mean that natural resource trustees would be precluded from
restoring injured fisheries once state and EPA remedial actions
have contained the source of the pollution. 

  
   o  "Cost effective" and "cost reasonable" requirements in H.R.
2500 will create significant additional transaction costs, and 
drive trustees toward selecting replacement measures and natural
recovery over actual restoration.  For example, although building
a hatchery for striped bass may be considered a cost-reasonable
alternative, it doesn't restore 200 miles of degraded fishery
habitat.  

  
   o  H.R. 2500 prohibits the recovery of damages for non-use
value, even though non-use values constitute real economic
losses.  Many individuals derive benefits from the existence of
the Hudson River beyond its recreational and commercial uses. 
This measure would leave the American public uncompensated for
its losses.

  
   o  H.R. 2500 will exempt polluters from paying the full cost
of restoring injured natural resources in the Hudson River.  As a
result, the residents of New York state will be forced to pay for
the restoration of resources that were injured by a polluter; or
will suffer the continuing loss of economic productivity from
injured natural resources.  
  
                            ###