This week, it seemed like a simple task: Add water treatment plants to the list of things that need to be shut down or removed.
But the process of moving the entire Superfund cleanup to a landfill is proving harder than it might have been, and that’s putting the cleanup into the hands of an agency that has no experience with these types of projects.
That’s where the Environmental Protection Agency comes in.
The agency has long been criticized for its handling of the Superstorm Sandy cleanup, and the agency was expected to get back on track this week, with EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt taking his first public step since taking office to address the storm.
That didn’t happen.
Pruitt said Friday that the agency will continue to work on a “solution” for the Clean Water Act cleanup of the storm’s stormwater contamination, and he said he wants to do it by the end of the year.
He did not specify when or where that solution will come.
The EPA has been on a tear over the past few years, and it’s not hard to see why.
The office is known for its clean-up efforts, from the EPA’s historic “superstorm” recovery project in the aftermath of Superstorm Katrina in 2005 to its cleanup efforts in the wake of Superstorms Sandy and Rita in 2011 and 2014.
The federal agency has also been criticized by lawmakers for its work in the nuclear industry.
The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is a division of the Department of Energy that oversees the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile.
Its mission is to ensure the safety of nuclear weapons, and one of its biggest tasks is to clean up after the superstorm.
The Clean Water Rule and the Clean Air Act have been among the biggest challenges faced by the NNSA and its contractors since Superstorm Irene.
The former law mandates that the Cleanwater Rule be used as a backup to the Cleaner Air Act when EPA and the National Parks Service have to act as a backstop to EPA.
The latter law requires that EPA and other agencies have the authority to make decisions that protect public health.
In the past, the NNSA has been criticized when it has pushed to use the Cleaners Rule to clean Superfund sites, and some lawmakers have argued that the rule does not go far enough to address what is now an urgent problem.
But it has also had a good run with its cleanups of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor and other sites, as well as the massive contamination at a wastewater treatment plant at the University of Texas at Austin.
That doesn’t mean the agency has been perfect.
In 2012, the EPA spent $1.5 million to clean a Superfund area near Houston after a leak at a coal mine, and EPA also cleaned up a Superpewter plant in Oklahoma in 2012 and spent $500,000 on a Supersite cleanup near Nashville.
The cleanups are a big part of the agency’s budget, and they help the agency keep the public safe.
They can also be a drag on its own ability to respond to emergencies and other threats.
But at the end, the agency is going to have to find a way to find the money to pay for all of these cleanups.
That can’t happen through Congress.
There are a number of ways the agency could find the funding to pay the cleanups, and Pruitt said that he wants Congress to come up with a plan that includes a clean-ups fund.
But even if Congress can find the funds, the cleanup process won’t be easy.
Pruitt has said he’s committed to a solution that involves the EPA moving the Superpews site to a site near its existing landfill.
The location is a complicated issue, as it’s located in the rural part of Louisiana, about a half-hour away from the Supersite, and there are some concerns about contamination in the soil and groundwater there.
There have also been concerns about whether the EPA could manage the site safely.
There’s also been concern that the EPA might need to use a different facility, such as one in a county that already has a Superplex cleanup facility.
The cleanup process also has the potential to take a long time, with the cleanup time in some cases going over years.
That could be problematic for the EPA, which already has several Superpups in the works.
A number of local government leaders have already raised questions about the cost of the cleanup, including Mayor Mike Parson of New Orleans.
EPA spokesman David Shull said the agency would be “more than happy to look at any other location” that can handle the cleanup.
But in the end it may not be possible to move all of the sites in the Superplex to a location in one place and have it ready for the next Superstorm, Shull added.
“We’re going to get the sites that can be cleaned up and then have the sites ready for a next storm, but we don’t want to have any sites that are going to be ready to