Appendix A

A brief description of five environmental shocks

Love Canal, New York

Throughout the 1940s and 1950s, the Love Canal area was a landfill for industrial waste and more than 21,000 tons of chemical wastes were ultimately deposited there. In the 1970s, Love Canal residents began to complain of health problems, including high rates of cancer, birth defects, miscarriages, and skin ailments. Eventually, New York State found high concentrations of dangerous chemicals in the air and soil. The Environmental Protection Agency claims that 56% of the children born in Love Canal between 1974 and 1978 had birth defects (Greenstone and Gallagher 2005). The New York Health Commissioner declared a public emergency on August 2, 1978. Within 2 weeks, President Carter declared an emergency in the area.

Three Mile Island

The accident at the Three Mile Island Unit 2 (TMI-2) nuclear power plant near Middletown, Pennsylvania on March 28, 1979 was the most serious in US commercial nuclear power plant operating history, even though it led to no deaths or injuries to plant workers or members of the nearby community. The sequence of certain events—equipment malfunctions, design related problems and worker errors—led to a partial meltdown of the TMI-2 reactor core but only very small off-site releases of radioactivity.

Bhopal

On December 3, 1984, a Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India sprang a leak, releasing thousands of gallons of highly toxic gas into the atmosphere. By the time the leak was sealed, over 2,000 people had died.

Chernobyl

On April 25 and 26, 1986, the world’s worst nuclear power accident occurred at the Chernobyl power plant 80 miles north of Kiev (in what is now the Ukraine). The Chernobyl accident killed more than 30 people immediately, and as a result of the high radiation levels in the surrounding 20-mile radius, 135,000 people had to be evacuated.

Exxon Valdez

On March 24, 1989, the Exxon Valdez grounded on Bligh Reef and spilled nearly 11 million gallons of oil into the biologically rich waters of Prince William Sound.

Appendix B

Fifteen catalytic votesa

Three Mile Island

1. HR 4338, Emergency Evacuation Plans for Nuclear Plants. The vote is on the Weaver amendment to prohibit the use of Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) funds for issuing operating licenses for nuclear power plants in states which had not submitted an emergency evacuation plan approved by the NRC. This was the first major nuclear vote in the House after the Three Mile Island accident. The amendment would probably have delayed operating licenses for some nuclear plants and highlighted the dangers involved for large population centers. It might also have allowed some states to block the licensing of new nuclear plants within their borders by refusing to submit any evacuation plan. Rejected 147-235 on June 18, 1979. Yes is the pro-green vote. 2. Nuclear Breeder Reactor HR 3000, Energy Department Civilian Programs. The vote is on the Fuqua amendment to terminate the Clinch River fast breeder reactor and to authorize $107 million to carry out a Department of Energy study and design for an alternative breeder. This represents a compromise by the Carter Administration which for 3 years previously had attempted to halt construction at Clinch River without making any serious commitment to build other breeder technologies. Amendment rejected 182-237 on July 26, 1980. Yes is the pro-green vote. 3. Nuclear Reactor Safety, HR 2608, Nuclear Regulatory Commission authorizations. The vote is on the Bingham amendment to require the NRC to report to Congress on which operating reactors were in compliance with specific safety regulations. The NRC was also required to supply a list of generic safety issues and problems which afflict many reactors. Since the NRC has added enormously to its list of safety requirements in recent years, many plants built earlier are not in compliance and widespread “grandfathering” procedures have allowed plants less than 5 years old to fall 10 to 15 years behind current safety standards. The passage of this amendment represents a major victory for environmentalists and provided them with much needed information to embarrass the nuclear industry and to press for safety reforms. Adopted 217-161 on November 29, 1979. Yes is the pro-green vote. 4. Nuclear Construction Moratorium, HR 2608, Nuclear Regulatory Commission authorizations. The vote is on the Markey amendment to put a 6-month moratorium on any new nuclear plant construction permits. This was considered a key test vote on nuclear power and the first time members voted after the Kemeny Commission had published its report criticizing the NRC for its handling of the accident at Three Mile Island. The effect of the amendment was partially symbolic since the NRC had a self-imposed moratorium on construction permits until the Three Mile Island accident was fully studied. The amendment did not apply to nuclear plants already under construction and would at the very most have affected from six to eight plants that were close to requesting permits. The Carter Administration opposed this amendment. Rejected 135-254 on November 29, 1979. Yes is the pro-green vote. Love Canal 5. HR 7020, Cleaning Up Toxic Chemicals. This is the vote to suspend the rules and pass the bill creating a $1.6 billion “Superfund” to finance the cleanup of toxic chemicals that are dumped or spilled into the environment. The EPA was made responsible for handling the fund and cleanup. Eighty-six percent of the money will come from taxes on the oil and chemical industry. The government was given authority to sue the companies who did the dumping for the cleanup costs and for up to $50 million in damages to natural resources. Oil spills, however, were not covered. The President was given some new authority to take action to clean up and prevent spills and to control hazardous substances threatening the public health. The bill was not as strong as an earlier Senate bill that also compensated victims for damages, but it was a major accomplishment nonetheless. Adopted 274-94 on December 3, 1980. Yes is the pro-green vote. 6. Hazardous waste regulation. The Gramm (D, TX) amendment sought to exempt businesses which generate, store or transport relatively small quantities of hazardous waste from the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The RCRA is the nation’s principal law governing the management and disposal of these wastes and was designed to avoid the creation of additional abandoned toxic dumps like Love Canal. Amendment rejected 148-183 on September 8, 1982. No is the pro-green vote. 7. Elimination of the Common Law Legal right of hazardous waste victims. Dannemeyer (R, CA) amendment to the RCRA reauthorization bill to remove a provision that preserves the right of individuals and state and local governments to sue hazardous waste generators under the common law. Amendment rejected 85-255 on September 8, 1982. No is the pro-green vote. Bhopal 8. Superfund Right to Know. This was on the Edgar-Sikorski Amendment to require polluters to publicly report any significant emission of cancer-causing and other extremely hazardous chemicals. This amendment created the Toxic Release Inventory database. Adopted 212-211 on December 10, 1985. Yes is the pro-green vote. Chernobyl 9. Nuclear Liability no. 1, amendment to HR 1414. The Price-Anderson Act was first passed in 1957. It was intended as a temporary ten-year measure to encourage the development of the newly formed nuclear power industry. It has been extended twice and expired on August 1, 1987. The Act protects the utilities and their contractors from liability in the event of an accident. The nuclear industry is the only industry in the US which does not have to pay full damages including compensation for death, injury and property damage caused by an accident. This vote is on the Eckart amendment to make the owners of commercial nuclear power plants responsible for fully compensating accident victims. After an accident, the owners of nuclear plants would be required to pay a limited amount of money into a compensation fund for as many years as necessary to fully compensate damages. The Eckart amendment was rejected 119-300 on July 29, 1987. Yes is the pro-green vote. 10. Nuclear Liability no. 2. This is another amendment to HR 1414, the Price-Anderson Act. The vote is on the Wyden amendment, which would make the private companies that carry out the Department of Energy’s nuclear programs liable for accidents caused by gross negligence or intentional misconduct. Under the Price-Anderson Act, these federal contractors are totally exempted from any accident liability. This amendment covered all aspects of the federal nuclear program, ranging from weapons production, research and testing to radioactive waste transportation, storage and disposal. Wyden Amendment rejected 193-226 on July 29, 1987. Yes is the pro-green vote. 11. Nuclear plant licensing. This vote was on the Markey amendment to prohibit the NRC from licensing for full power operation the nuclear power plants at Seabrook, New Hampshire and Shoreham, New York unless the emergency evacuation plans met the old NRC rules. The amendment was rejected 160-261 on August 5, 1987. Yes is the pro-green vote. Exxon Valdez 12. Oil Spill Liability and States’ Rights. To amend the Miller (D, CA) amendment to HR 1465, oil pollution limits, to remove provisions that dealt with state authority as it related to cleanups. Amendment rejected 151-270 on November 8, 1989. No is the pro-green vote. 13. The Hughes amendment would have prevented state and local laws from setting higher liability limits than those in the House bill. The amendment would have repealed the laws of several states such as Alaska, California, and Maine which require the spiller of oil to pay the full cost of cleanup. Amendment rejected 171-252 on November 8, 1989. No is the pro-green vote. 14. To amend HR 1465, oil pollution limits, to change the liability standards so that liability limits would not apply to spills due to negligence as opposed to gross negligence. Adopted 213-207 on November 8, 1989. Yes is the pro-green vote. 15. To amend HR 1465, oil pollution limits, to change the liability standards so that liability limits would not apply to spills due to negligence as opposed to gross negligence or willful misconduct. Rejected 185-197 on November 9, 1989. Yes is the pro-green vote.

aData Sources are the League of Conservation Voters Scorecards (see www.lcv.org) and Keith Poole’s Voteview webpage.

Appendix C

Case study of the Post-Exxon Valdez legislation chronology

NOVEMBER 8, 1989b

Y = 151 N = 270 TAUZIN (D, LA)

To amend the Miller (D, CA) amendment to HR 1465, oil pollution limits, to remove provisions that dealt with state authority as it related to cleanups.

NOVEMBER 8, 1989

Y = 279 N = 143 MILLER (D, CA)

To amend HR 1465, oil pollution limits, to prevent federal law from preempting state laws that deal with oil spill liability and related issues.

NOVEMBER 8, 1989

Y = 169 N = 251 SHUMWAY (R, CA)

To amend HR 1465, oil pollution limits, to allow a party to be able to seek redress under either federal or state law, but not both.

NOVEMBER 8, 1989b

Y = 171 N = 252 HUGHES (D, NJ)

To amend HR 1465, oil pollution limits, to prohibit state or local liability limits higher than those set in this legislation.

NOVEMBER 8, 1989b

Y = 213 N = 207 MILLER (D, CA)

To amend HR 1465, oil pollution limits, to change the liability standards so that liability limits would not apply to spills due to negligence as opposed to gross negligence.

NOVEMBER 9, 1989b

Y = 185 N = 197 MILLER (D, CA)

To amend HR 1465, oil pollution limits, to change the liability standards so that liability limits would not apply to spills due to negligence as opposed to gross negligence or willful misconduct.

NOVEMBER 9, 1989

Y = 375 N = 5

To pass HR 1465, oil pollution limits, to set limits on liability and damages caused by oil spills and to establish a fund to help pay for those damages.

bIndicates that the LCV identified this vote as a “key” vote.