The House of Representatives is calling for a “full overhaul” of the federal program that provides money to local communities near large Energy Department sites that cannot be taxed. That would include terminating all existing agreements, according to legislation passed in the House earlier this month.
Given that localities cannot tax property owned by the U.S. government, Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) programs have served as a means to provide federal funding to communities situated around such land – for DOE, that covers facilities such as the 586-square-mile Hanford Site in Washington state and the 310-square-mile Savannah River Site in South Carolina, both home to large cleanup and radioactive waste management programs.
Up to date figures for the number of communities receiving PILT money, and the accumulation of payouts, could not immediately be identified. But through 1993, 26 of 49 affected communities had sought and received PILT payments, according to a 1994 General Accounting Office (now Government Accountability Office) report. By the end of 1993, $22.4 million in PILT payments had been made since the 1940s.
Most of the communities around DOE’s major sites receive PILT, said Kara Colton, nuclear energy programs director for the Energy Communities Alliance.
But House energy appropriators said the PILT program has gotten out of hand over the years. “The formulas used by DOE to determine what payments it will make are not transparent, are not interpreted consistently across all sites, and no longer appear to be consistent with the intent of Congress,” according to the House report on its Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill. The report indicates that DOE last visited the issue of PILT guidance in 2003.
House Appropriations energy and water subcommittee Chairman Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) made reference to PILT disparities in a Sept. 14 address to the Energy Department’s National Cleanup Workshop in Alexandria, Va. Citing the GAO study from the 1990s, Simpson said payments to localities can be as little as $1,000 or as much as $6 million, and it’s hard to decipher what criteria DOE is using to justify the amounts.
Simpson, who evidently authored the House PILT language, told the gathering that consistent, understandable criteria are needed for the program. The lawmaker’s office, though, did not this week confirm whether he had added the measure to the energy bill.
“After reasonable notice has been given in the Federal Register,” the House wants DOE “to terminate” all existing PILT agreements and enter into new ones using consistent, transparent criteria, according to the House report.
The House bill also calls for a Comptroller General assessment of the PILT program.
The full House earlier this month approved the legislation as part of a government-wide funding program for the budget year beginning Oct. 1. There is no language in the Senate Energy and Water Appropriations bill regarding DOE PILT payments, a source said Thursday. The House language will have to be discussed in conference, which has not started yet.
ECA, which represents local governments and tribes around Cold War cleanup sites, said it is not opposed to updating the criteria for such payments. On the other hand, the organization does not want DOE to prematurely terminate existing PILT agreements that are crucial for many communities.
“DOE has often attempted not to pay or to reduce the PILT payments at the sites,” ECA said in a recent analysis. “Each year DOE contacts at least one community to discuss cuts or delays to the payments – a practice which has increased over the past two years,” ECA said.
